Slashdot Mirror
Tim Berners-Lee Attains Knighthood
sandalwood writes "Tim Berners-Lee has been promoted to Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire for coming up with that 'intarweb' thing we all use. Characteristically modest, he said that he was an ordinary person who created something that 'just happened to work out.' He will join luminaries like Isaac Newton, Francis Drake, and... Mick Jagger."
"Tim Berners-Lee", of course, is just a clever pseudonym for Al Gore. The article failed to mention this.
CC Licensed Serialized Story and Podcast: Ingenioustries
..now he can slay orcs and save princesses like the best of us.
---
Never criticize religion on Slashdot. You will be modded down for "Troll" no matter how factual it is.
Great... I hear the Great Al Gore Joke/Debate already comming....
ARPA was an American military project.
I have been pwned because my
Canadian Cynic, canadian politics is less boring than you
Tim Berners-Lee Attains Knighthood does that come with +2 armour?
Well, pardon him for departing from your standards of perfection. I for one don't fault him for accepting an award that he so obviously deserves. History notwithstanding, being knighted is a high honor (honour!) for a Brit. I say congratulations to him.
ELITISM: It's always lonely at the top. Uninvited company is rarely welcome.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You guys do know that getting the KBE is completely different to becoming a Knight and being called "Sir", don't you? I couldn't care less (down with the Monarchy), but if you really want to know the BBC explains it all as usual.
Yes, no one is questioning how good is accomplishments are.
Let's put it this way... if I declared him "High Angel of Intellectual Perfection" or some other title (hey I'm being creative) do you think he would care about such an honor from me-- a nobody? Do you think he would take that honor from the chinese, or perhaps Sadam Hussein?
The Queen should not have any authority. She doesn't deserve it.
---
Never criticize religion on Slashdot. You will be modded down for "Troll" no matter how factual it is.
Rather than Mick Jagger.
Gawd bless 'er.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Fundamentalism is idiocy.
And your post proves you're a fundamentalist.
Netscape. It would have never taken off without a decent web browser... Mosaic would have never taken off.
One wonders where we would be today with the WWW if Tim had chosen to patent his invention?
Except that it's not really an honour from the queen. Decisions are made by some top secret bunch of civil servants, vetted by the Prime Minister and then "suggested" to the queen. Not much better, admittedly, but an improvement none the less.
Reform is coming, but the present style of system won't go away until the monarchy finally keels over. I'll celebrate as much as anyone on that day, but until then the honours system is the only way to formally recognise people's acheivements. Inventing Hypertext certainly deserves some recognition IMHO.
Insightful or interesting? My arse.
I love my national traditions, heritage and "outdated" ways - It's what keeps us Brits from being totally assimilated into the rest of bland western culture of crap movies, worse music and painful political-correctness which is hemorrhaging from the United States of America.
God Save the Queen!
During the early 90's his research was put down by other Hypermedia researchers. Their view: "we've been there, done that; your implementation is too simple, too restrictive; our research is towards two directional linking..., other systems before you are better...". His first paper was rejected by the Hypertext Conference in 1991, and he settled for a demo table in the same venue.
The key to his success is that he made it simple and free (as in beer)! Others, like Nelson's Xanadu, were too ambitious. Others, like Hypercards, Hypernotes, Hyperdisco, etc were never free.
The BBC article highlights that in one of the side boxes: "Offered free on the Net".
Well I'll be. That infotainment super-highball is worth at least one plated medallion.
Good on ya, ya limey suisse.
I'm glad to see TBL get some more recognition. The original concepts behind html and semantic markup were well designed for their time and deserve more recognition. 99% of web designers today seem to have no idea why they should be using 'em' instead of 'b' tags, nor do many seem to even care about semantics and platform neutral markup. TBL and his semantic web ideas need all the recognition they can get.
A few years ago I watched a special on PBS about the birth of the Internet. The astounding thing was watching a video featuring a dozen guys hanging around a chalkboard laying out the eight or so connections that formed the forst internet web. No fancy electronics, just a groupd of guys standing around a chalkboard and talking.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
That's much awesome. Good for TBL.
Actually, information would like a turkey sandwich.
I mean, it may not be much of an honour, but it's not like it's a BAFTA or something, it's not completely meaningless. And I'd hardly put Liz in with Saddam, just because her role is an anachronism doesn't make her evil or her intents bad.
BTW if you're just pissed because, in fact, you did offer Tim the coveted High Angel of Intellectual Perfection and he turned it down, please look into awarding it to someone else.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Preface: not a troll
Could someone please explain to me the British fetish for its Monarchy ? The government is now a constitutional democracy, so why is there so much homage paid to the archaic traditions and figureheads of the past?
A great example of this is the insane media land-grab over Princess Diana's death. Hundreds of thousands of people die in traffic accidents each year - why was hers so deserving of three whole months of media coverage, weeping, wailing, and moaning?
K. Richards best put it to Mick Jagger [who also got knighted recently]: "If you're into this shit, hang on for the peerage. Don't settle for a little badge.".
Rock on Keith!
there's no place like ~
I doubt he cares much more than anyone else.
Here's something much more interesting, an interview with him - Tim (available in Proprietary err Windows Media format).
ClickOnline
(Please don't put too much into the fact that the pageid is 666.)
She's... "Queen". And therefore, people respect her.
Very few English ppl respect the queen, she is just a tourst attaction.
England is ruled by a diffrent dictatiorship(sp), that of the un-elected, and unaccountable Quango.
Wow, I should not post when knackered.
This is what knighthoods are about - accepting official appreciation of the work done to create the internet, an apolitical act. The poster above ridicules TB-L for accepting the award - it would be right and proper to decline for political reasons, but in this case there are none. Anyway, he's a nice guy. Matthew
If I were a member of the British royal family, I would not accept any "Prince" or whatever position. It's ridiculous, and it's a waste of time or money.
---
Never criticize religion on Slashdot. You will be modded down for "Troll" no matter how factual it is.
It's not political. Politically, the British monarchy doesn't do much of anything. It is mostly a cultural thing. The monarchy is a cherished institution of Great Britain. It represents the history and culture of a great country. It has endured for hundreds of years as one of the most stable governments in the West. The British monarchy has one of the oldest democratic traditions in the world, and Britain gave birth to the philosophers from which our founding fathers derived their inspiration. Getting rid of the British monarchy would be like getting rid of the monuments of Greece, because they take up space that could be put to better use.
There is no need for everything in the world to be cold and logical. If a country wants to hold onto a 'silly' institution as a symbol of their nation, so be it.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Politically, I can't see why Britian still has a royal family. Seems like a bunch of mooches to me.
;-)
Officially I believe the Queen has the power to dissolve the government if it became undemocratic, and I think she has some level of official power over the lawmaking process too. She's just a figurehead really now, but those powers could be invoked if neccessary.
AFAICS, however, the unoficial reason is because nobody is bothering to abolish them and they aren't doing much harm to anyone really.
Take all that with more than a small pinch of salt though, my only qualification to speak on the subject is that I'm English and I listened a bit to some debate about the royals
The www is nothing more that the internet with a waffle iron attached to it.
no monarchy=no path of roots to britishness
"Banned from using the university's computer when he and a friend were caught hacking"
Does this mean he is the First Hacker to be Knighted.
. . .is like someone for death-penalties to win the Nobel Peace Prize. . .
Yasser Arafat, 1994, so it would seem anything is possible.
KFG
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum videtur (anything said in Latin sounds important)
Mod parent down..it's a flagrant attempt to use a secondary account to generate karma. Lockdown this motherfucker. Think before you moderate.
that of the dictatorship of the eu.
Fuckoff!
Yep, only one word!
When will Al Gore get knighted? He invented the Internet, for chrissakes! (He said so on CNN)
this is not a troll
its dead-center on topic and its a valid question.
If you don't like what he has to say, respond. Don't show that your argument is weak by censoring the opposing viewpoint.
that so many are anti-british-monarchy, tens of countries still have the queen as their head of state (completely willingly), the rest worship her (the US etc) and the Europeans murdered most of their own.
british monarchy should stay, otherwise britain is just like every other country nobody gives a shit about.
Well, Denmark is the oldest monerchy in the world, other than that you're probably right.
No, YOU FAIL IT! baby!!!
It's too bad being knighted isn't what it used to be. Now days, everyone in pop culture has been knighted, so those who truly deserve recognition are lumped in with the lights of Paul McCartney, McJabber, Elton John...
Henry Kissenger did too.
Huh, I didn't know that. But I didn't say that GB had the oldest monarchy. I said it had one of the oldest democratic traditions. Even when the country was an absolute monarchy, it was still a relatively free society.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Just curious - what great cultural achievements set you apart from the hated West? Soccer hooliganism and darts? Spice Girls?
It really used to bother me, all the hatred for the US. Being characterized as a fat, stupid, neocon American used to really get to me. Recently I've realized that all you Euros are just a bunch of elitist pseudo-intellect blowhards. Cram it, asshat.
You don't like us, we sure as fuck don't like you. Why don't we just leave this site as one by Americans, for Americans and you asslicks segregate yourself?
That whooshing sound you heard was the point of my post rushing over your head. I think you need to lay off the caffeine, old chap.
I'll celebrate as much as anyone on that day, but until then the honours system is the only way to formally recognise people's acheivements.
And yet hundreds of great men and women have the strength of character to tell the Queen to shove it when "She" comes around peddling her wares. To bad Mr. Berners-Lee couldn't have been among them.
Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
that everyone knows the names of Edison, and for the most part, Tesla. But, when it comes to folks such as Tim Berners-Lee, J. Prespert Eckert, John W. Mauchly, etc. nobody has any clue who you're talking about.
Unless I'm mistaken, the revolutions that these folks spurred were arguably as important to the state of modern society as was the lightbulb, telephone, or rail transit.
(Yes, I'm aware that's irrelevent. Needless to say, it's also irrelevent that "ARPANET" is American from the point of view of awarding a Knighthood to a Brit who was involved in creating a key part of the Internet.)
Hundreds of other great men and women have been able to resist the kow-towing to the monarchy. I which he had joined them.
Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
Not yet, and we can hope that one day Brits will get to vote on EU stuff... maybe...
Wow, I should not post when knackered.
Oh, I'm not comparing the queen to saddam. It's just that I don't think the queen should be important enough to be able to give such honors.
Yes, I think he certainly deserves the honor, no doubt about it. But the queen just shouldn't have the prestige of being able to hand it out, so to speak.
---
Never criticize religion on Slashdot. You will be modded down for "Troll" no matter how factual it is.
"Huh. They have Internet on computers now!" -H.J.S.
Rock!
If he's a knight, does he have to fight dragons?
So says the person naming himself LordK3nn3th.
Yeah, sure you would.
"There are some who call me...Sir Tim
In part, I think it is a reaction to today's fast-paced cultural changes. Many people appreciate links back to what they see as a simpler time, regardless of the historical truths of disease and lawlessness.
It's all about traditions. It is our traditions that make our society what it is. For the British, the monarchy is a large part of that tradition. The actual personages aren't important so much as the symbol of security.
In a fast-changing society, many people like to hold onto something unchanging, to ground themselves.
Politas
It'd be funny if it wasn't tragic:
The brits think Tony Blair and New Labour are foisting EU crap on them and that's where the bad policies come from.
The EU people think the Brits are foisting American crap on them in the European Parliament (and they are, to an extent: witness Arlene McCarthy and Software Patents), and that's where the bad policies come from.
The American people think Bush is foisting Europan crap on them from the WTO, and that's where the bad policies come from.
In actuality, all these policies come from corporatist (see Mussolini) semi-secret groups like the Bilderbergers. It's a classic divide-and-conquer attack by a bunch of neofascist assholes intent on remaining in power.
However, I could really care less outside of the 30 seconds it took to write this. My taxes don't cover it so let Mick and the rest of them have their fun!
Sir Tim HAS been knighted. He didn't get an OBE or some other lesser award. The parent post is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Politas
Well I wonder if TBL will ever be asked to go on a crusade to the holy land or re-claim brittany from those Frenchies. Theres certainly no damsels in distress, imprisoned in a tower by an evil uncle. There are no dragons left to slay and the holy grail got sold on ebay for $5.99 Sorry but a real knight belongs in our stories and myths. The highest honor we can give TBL is not a three letter prefix Sir, but the recogniton that his work, kick started all this web stuff and his ideas for the furture of the web are more important than making a fast buck.
If a country wants to hold onto a 'silly' institution as a symbol of their nation, so be it.
Thankfully, this does not apply to the U.S. and the RIAA, despite the fact that it is "a silly institution" that definitely serves as "a symbol of their nation".
(disclaimer: I'm an American)
"Why Subscribe?" Good question...
And without the Brit's strong national identity, what would become of the Irish Republic, which is based largely on "we're not Britain!" for national identity :-).
I for one, welcome our British web overlords.
As long as there's people like me around, you've got about as much chance of a republic of Britain as microsoft have of winning 'OS of the Year' in Linux Journal! Seriously, if you want a civil war just say so; myself and my friends are up for it; it'll give us a good chance to "get rid" (being polite) of people like you without any comeback! It comes down to whether having a republic is as important to you as having a monarchy is for people like us. If you're not willing to fight for it then keep you mouth shut, because we are!
So when does LordK3nn3th of Slashdote bestow the H.A.I.P.s this year? Is there a cash stipend?
"...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
England doesn't have that. All they have to make them unique from the rest of Europe is their monarchy, so they celebrate it.
Of course, you have to really feel bad for Canada or Australia. They celebrate another country's monarchy. Talk about pathetic.
can you encrypt data streams with it?
Rock on... indeed. More like, rock the Baby Seat. Bleed on Keith!
People like to have leaders to look up to. No matter how useless, parasitic and dumb they are. Think George W. Bush on the aircraft carrier.
but it always makes me laugh when someone is given any title, honorary or not, simply by birth and that they somehow have reign (again, in name or in reality) over conquered and subjigated people.
Well, Denmark is the oldest monerchy in the world, other than that you're probably right.
Actually, the Japanese monarchy dates back to 660 BC, making it by far the oldest in the world. Denmark's is more than thousand years younger, the starting date is not established precisely.
Check this page for more information on the different current and former monarchies of the world.
When men used to be men
bunch of elitist pseudo-intellect blowhards
We're l33t and intellectual. Deal with it, fat stupid neocon American.
"Brilliant, then you can get on with your transition to Ingsoc and your licking of Dim Georgie Bush's chickenhawk boots. Whatever happened to "Britons never shall be slaves"?"
Hmmm how to tar and feather all the British People with the same brush, not all of us are arse licking poodles like Tony Blair, there are a substantial portion of British people that dislike George Bush and believe that his war on Iraq was wrong, indeed almost 2 millions people attended a Stop the War rally in London earlier this year...
Isn't the British national identity based on "we're not Europe" and pretty much nothing else? Pretty sad to see them crawling up those US asses all the time tho.
I was only being a smartass about the excessive use of the word "fuck". *sigh* Oh well...troll it is.
Life is not for the lazy.
For the last time, we don't give a damn about Jackson, Bryant, Peterson, Limbaugh, or anybody else. Just shut up about it already and report some REAL news.
I'm not sure who you refer to as we, but it's not the majority of people. The general public loves celebrities, yellow press and the whole star-mania. It's the glamour, the wealth, the dirty secrets. Maybe the ordinary guy can dream about the what-if scenario of being in that position, etc., that's probably dealt with in psychology 101.
That stuff sells. Of course it's not hard news, but the media give to the people what they want. The Simple Life had a bigger audience than the interview with President Bush (first one after the capturing of Saddam Hussein) broadcast at the same time. Go figure.
...did Mick Jagger get on there?
SIGERR: laziness exceeds quota
The UK does have a constitution, it just doesn't have a written one.
Reference here for an explanation.
Politas
Whatever else a knighthood brings with it it's got to be a great pickup line and a geek can use all the help available.
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
Just to give this a little context, it's awesome that he has been knighted, especially for a techy guy, but it's not quite as unique as it seems, given that dozens of celebs have been offered knighthood and refused just in the last few years.
... and Tom Paris.
On a side note, did anybody else read He will join luminaries like Isaac Newton, Francis Drake, and... Mick Jagger and subsequently have a phrase pop into his head:
I think the main attitude about the monarchy is that it works, so there's really no need to bother trying to fix it. Far beyond Britain itself, there's an entire empire of other countries whose constitutional systems are all tied in with the British monarchy. Removing it would require massive infrastructural changes all over the world. Plus, lots of people like it and they're prepared to pay for it.
I hardly think you can put that reaction down to having anything to do with the monarchy. The media frenzy was because she was popular and well known. The monarchy merely provided a vehicle that got her to that position, but how she got there wasn't really of interest to the media.
There's no shortage of examples of very similar things happening that had nothing to do with the British monarchy. The USA has at least as many examples of media irrationality in the face of popularity, and probably a lot more. The OJ Simpson trial is the example that most easily comes to mind. All he did was play a game quite well a few years ago, and now that he has a problem everyone wants to know about it. Having details of it broadcast every day for months on most of the major news networks was just silly, in my own opinion... and yet people who had never heard of the guy before he got on CNN (all over the world) were following the news of it because the media told them it was important. It was a murder trial but it was hardly unusual.
You get the same reaction from people whether there's a monarchy or no monarchy.
Well, since your flamebait is modded insightfull I think I'll flame back and see if the moderaters get it right this time.
Politically, the British monarchy doesn't do much of anything. It is mostly a cultural thing. The monarchy is a cherished institution of Great Britain.
The United Kingdom is a Constitutional Monarchy. It is very much a political thing. Despite the Crown's very limited role in politics they are by defination involved as the Head of State (not Head of Government).
It represents the history and culture of a great country. It has endured for hundreds of years as one of the most stable governments in the West.
The "most stable" is a matter of opinion but I'll let that stand.
The British monarchy has one of the oldest democratic traditions in the world, and Britain gave birth to the philosophers from which our founding fathers derived their inspiration.
Have you ever heard of the Roman Republic? England wasn't a member of that. They were occupied later during the Empire. And yes, Locke and Hobbes provided many ideas for the American Government. But so did Plato, Aristotle and numerous philosophers in France during the Enlightenment. England does not have a monopoly on those ideas and at the time, did not practice them.
Getting rid of the British monarchy would be like getting rid of the monuments of Greece, because they take up space that could be put to better use.
If I recall correctly you still have a good deal of the Parthenon in the British Museum and the Greek have been asking for those pieces back for years.
If you're going to be on a high horse, make sure the horse is on solid ground. And this is flamebait but I feel better saying it.
Thanks.....
Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
In America, the royals are the sons and daughters of the greatest of all the robber barons.
In Britain, the royals are the sons and daughters of the greatest of all the feudal barons [which is the same as robber].
In America, you are allowed to become a noble or start a new line of nobility by getting filthy rich and then buying yourself a Senator. You can then pass your wealth to your children so they can be nobles for having done nothing.
In Britain, the Queen hands you a medal, and then you can possibly get a seat for yourself and your descendants in the House of Lords. You can then pass your wealth to your children so they can be nobles for having done nothing.
At least in the UK, the monarchy has a lot of interesting history behind it, and some way cool outfits. Swords and capes! Now that is cool. Plus, the titles are awesome - for the king when the next one is: "His Most Britannic Majesty".
In America, well, we just say, "Mr.Gates".
This is my sig.
e.g. http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/dailynews/ sirmick020615.html , etc.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
To Americans, being knighted is just below winning an MTV People's Choice award. ;-)
On his return, he was reported to have taken rook E4
~Chris Hammond
OK, here's a question - the royals own fairly large chunks of the British Isles, so what would happen if they answered an abolishment attempt by offering to evict everyone from their properties? I believe Charles owns Cornwall, for example...
The United Kingdom is a Constitutional Monarchy. It is very much a political thing. Despite the Crown's very limited role in politics they are by defination involved as the Head of State (not Head of Government).
>>>>>>>>>>>
Huh? You declare that the Monarchy is very much political, and then immediatelyl admit that it has a very limited role in politics. Which is it?
The "most stable" is a matter of opinion but I'll let that stand.
>>>>>>>>>>
FI said "one of" the most stable. The British government has been remarkably stable for hundreds of years. Unlike France, the democratization of Britain came not through a bloody revolution, but a gradual transition.
Have you ever heard of the Roman Republic? England wasn't a member of that.
>>>>>>>>>
I didn't say first, I said oldest. Generally, when we talk about the oldest of some thing, we do not consider things that no longer exist, like the Roman Republic.
Locke and Hobbes provided many ideas for the American Government. But so did Plato, Aristotle and numerous philosophers in France during the Enlightenment.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes other philosophers did influence the Founding Fathers. Some directly and others indirectly. But the primary philosophical basis for the American government was British philosophy.
England does not have a monopoly on those ideas
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
Did I claim it did?
and at the time, did not practice them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
While Great Britain did not practice the precise philosophy espoused by Lock and others, many of those philosophers' ideas were derived from British practice. Great Britain has been a free society for hundreds of years, even under the monarchy, and much existing pratice was codified by its philosophers.
If I recall correctly you still have a good deal of the Parthenon in the British Museum and the Greek have been asking for those pieces back for years.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
What's your point? I am not claiming that Britain is faultless. Indeed, as someone of Indian descent, I have an innate dislike of Britain and its colonial period. However, I do recognize a good thing when I see it. Great Britain has a very proud and rich history, and a tradition of freedom. The monarchy is a part of that, and is a cultural institution that should remain in place as a reminder of the nation's glory.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Looking forward to the last dance hugs and kisses Kali :D
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
...he's supposed to learn how to ride mares...
Good for him! and about time too.
And why stop at a knighthood? They should make him an Url.
GROGGS: alive and well and living in
I like your posts, but this quoting style needs some kind of terminator sent back in time to kill its parents. You throw away reasonable points by making them hard to read.
Just my humble thought as a non-American.
This will certainly be redundant, but there are many that have refused Knighthood for example they include rock star David Bowie, Nigella Lawson, John Cleese, Kenneth Branagh, Albert Finney, Vanessa Redgrave, and many more. Knighthood is a pathetic extension of imperialism that no longer exists.
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
God Save the Queen!
Johnny Rotten/Sex Pistols anyone?
litigious bastards
suck it sco!
You proclaimed the Monarchy as a cultural insitution. They are a political institution.
If mean "the British government" as an institution then yes they are fairly stable. I was thinking of their actions over the last 200-300 years. That strikes me as less than stable.
Free society for hundreds of years? I have a silent e on the end of my name. My ancestors were given the choice of being exciled from their home or spend the rest of their lives in a debtors prison.
Britian has a great deal of glory. It is one of my favorite places on this planet but I don't think you and I will ever agree on where that comes from.
Sure, because they were afraid of being ridiculed by their socialist chums for selling out and or kissing up to the monarchy. Not having seen TBL reading out of the little red book lately, I see no reason why this shallow and superficial ( and meaningless ) gesture should prevent him from accepting this mark of recognition from a group of UK civil servants.
Keep refusing those honors, technologists! After all, you won't have any indie cred otherwise.
o<First of, IANBBMAW (I am not British, but my ancestors were).
That's right, as I recall. In case of Parliament going nuts or somesuch, or divided beyond being able to form even a coalition government, it is the duty of Her Majesty to get an appointed PM in place until matters can resolve. Example: if in the next British election, noone holds a majority or can form a coalition (or some Fascists turn up out of the blue), the monarchy would most likely exercise constitutional duty and keep Blair on Downing Street.
...both turned this nonsensical crap down, and good for them.
There is, however one more thing that distinguishes them from the rest of Europe - unlike other nations they are complete assholes.
Now that he's a knight, does he has to stagger everywhere he goes? Me, I'd much rather be a bishop - diagonal movement only, sure, but much easier to manage, I'd think.
The monarchy is a cultural institution. Semantically, they are indeed a political institution, but as you say, they have no political involvement. Yet they remain an important part of British society. Why? Because their role in British culture far outstrips its minor role in politics. Hence, it can be considered a cultural institution.
Nothing that has happened in the past 200-300 years every threatened the stability of the British government. While the British did many things that caused instability and chaos, at no time was the government itself really in any danger. There haven't even been any civil wars in Great Britain since the 1600s. In this sense, the British government is remarkably stable, compared to say the French government over the same time period.
The British do have a very old democratic tradition, at least for its own people. The Parlaiment was an important force by the early 17th century, and took supremacy from the king after the glorious revolution of 1688. The British have done many things to tarnish this tradition of freedom, but I still assert that the tradition remains intact. The United States, too, has done many things that go against the principles of freedom and democracy, but it is still legitimate to say that it has an important democratic tradition.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
anybody remember any of the following?
no? thank god!
2 1337 4 u!
They're hardly unique for having a monarchy. Spain, Sweden, Holland, etc, all have monarchies.
Now that, I would agree with. :)
And now I'm going to bed.
Blessed +5 Dragon Scale Mail, in fact, if you're willing to put up with the -57 aura of sheer geekliness.
Tweet, tweet.
Umm, would you care to back that up with facts? For example, which states? Relevant section of law, if possible?
I am not aware of any state where anyone may marry under 16 (I'm not saying there aren't any, but I haven't heard of them), and even then you need your parents' permission unless you're an emancipated minor.
Your point about his posting AC is well taken, but it may be even worse than you think. He may have posted as AC out of a beliefe that /. karma is actually somehow worth something. The horror!
:-)
While it is true that the United States has accomplished an impressive amount of things in a relatively short period of time (less than 250 years), and among them one of the most impressive has been making the best and the brightest of other nations want to come and live here, and thus leapfrogging the rest of the world in science, technology, economic power, and good old butt-kicking military power (g), the contributions and accomplishments of Britain must not be forgotten.
The U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution were groundbreaking documents, stunningly radical in their time. However, the seeds of the US Constitution - the legal framework of the first modern democracy - hark back to the Magna Carta, which is about 500 years older and devised in Britain.
For more of what the Brits did right and others didn't do so right, take a look around the world at former colonies of various former colonial powers. The French were extent in Southeast Asia (then called Indochina) and a number of Pacific Islands, and in Africa. The British were in Hong Kong, India and what is now Pakistan, South Africa, Zimbabwe (Rhodesia at the time), and Singapore and Malaysia, among others.
They have left their colonies, as have the rest of the colonial powers. What the British also left behind was a strong legacy of the rule of law. That, more than anything else, is why Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Africa are quite prosperous, and several of there other former colonies are closing in rapidly on real prosperity, with Malaysia leading the way. Zimbabwe would have done well also, but the rule of law was replaced by the rule of thuggery after Mugabe let power go to his head and he turned out to be nothing but a dictator. That, is, however, a miss among many hits.
Compare that to the French legacy. Corruption was SOP in their colonies, and corruption and old-boy networks are what they left behind. Take a look at their former colonies today. Most are corrupt and poor.
And the Spanish. They were at least as bad as the French, maybe worse. All of their former colonies were corrupt and poor, and usually dictatorships, for a very long time. The emergence of democracies in South America is a pretty recent thing and has a lot to do with American influence. Mostly, they are still poor, and there's still a lot of corruption, but they have become more democratic and they are slowly working on the corruption part.
Don't sell the Brits short, they did a lot. Don't forget that the United States itself was a British colony before we told George III to get stuffed. Our legal system descends directly from the British legal system, and that strong respect for the rule of law is what held us together all these years to become the power we are today.
So let's lighten up on the Brit bashing. Go bash the French instead, they deserve it
... out of your butt and just have a laugh!
You make Al Gore seem like the life of the party.
- sigs are for wimps.
well actually, it's more of a tourist thing.
"Teachers leave us kids alone
In the UK, few civil servants ever become rich from their jobs. Working at CERN, Sir Tim was ultimately just another Civil Servant and could only be compensated as such. Recognition for civil servants comes through the honours system. In this case it was richly deserved.
If your company produces massive exports for the UK and raises the international profile of the UK, then you maz be eligable for an honour. British pop-stars are one aspect of this, but only if they have been around for ages and haven't moved all their money offshore.
I don't know if any americans have realised this yet, but a Knighthood in England is basically a "Presidential Medal of Freedom", UK style.
.au and we wanted to become a republic once. It failed miserably because people didn't like the model the Government came up with.
AFAIC, TBL deserves it more than anyone. And if he accepts it, it's his choice.
As for the monarchy, I'm from
The only defference between the Queen and the President is she was born into it, whereas he had to BUY his way into it (not without some help from daddy).
Jonny Wilkinson!
A bonnie boot for a bonnie ball!
He'll never buy a pint of beer in England again!
Although the Queen must approve laws preneted to her by Parliament, she has the right to be consulted, to advise and to warn. Her political experience is unique and is recognised by all prime ministers.
Her last but most significant power is to appoint a government. In crude terms, this is based on a majority in parliament, but with more than two parties it is possible that no one has the majority. She has to recognise the largest power grouping.
Of course, Tim deserves honour for what he has done. This is just the wrong way.
Oh, I'm not comparing the queen to saddam.
Uh... yes you were. Maybe you need to reread your post, or check out what compare means or something.
Brian Reid inveneted Scribe (as his PhD thesis) which begat SGML which begat HTML. Einar Stefferud suggested MIME to Nathanial Borenstein who implemented it. Macs had that Hypercard thing way back when. Didn't TBL just put the bits together? (And Andresson made is usable?)
It's still cool he's been knighted.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Writing a client server pair (httpd + browser) isn't a really big deal, and is something software engineers have had to do all the time. Hypertext isn't a big deal either. The fellow is completely correct, he is a normal good engineer doing his job pretty well. Since you are reading Slashdot, you probably deserve a knighthood too. Me too, come to think of it.
Really. Tim Berners really does know what he is talking about. The world is a strange place. Luck, karma, or grace are so much more important than aptitude and skill when it comes to becoming famous.
This is not "characteristic modesty", and to call it such is an insult. It is actually an astute and correct observation. Tim deserves a knighthood for making the observation that he does not deserve a knighthood for making an html browser.
That's a monarchist defence by saying "if the nazis got elected, they'd be there to help us" (because at least technically, the armed forces are loyal to the queen).
Trouble is, the queen would then be acting against the will of the people (however bad that will was).
Personally, I'd rather we had a proper constitution, checks and balances and all that, than a PM who can just do anything, and hope the queen might be able to do something if it all went wrong.
Who do I write to to suggest it?
The U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution were groundbreaking documents, stunningly radical in their time. However, the seeds of the US Constitution - the legal framework of the first modern democracy - hark back to the Magna Carta, which is about 500 years older and devised in Britain.
There isn't really much relationship between the Magna Carta and the US Constitution. The US Constitution has its roots firmly in the Englightenment of the 18th century, which was influenced by the events in the English Civil War (which was actually several wars) and movements prevalent at that time, e.g. the Levellers, and also by French and Scottish philosophers (mostly).
The Magna Carta was a political settlement concerned with feudalism, and feudalism was eventually usurped, but it was relatively minor compared to other limits put on kingly power in places such as Poland or by the Italian Communes of the Renaissance.
You were so close to being killfiled too.
PROBABLY the only knighthood one can agree with in this year's list. It is pathetic that the whole English rugby team got honoured.
There was a time, I assume, when knighthood meant something. Now it's a way for beleagured prime ministers to show the public how in-touch and cool they are.
(As you will know, the prime minister (President Blair as he is known to his friends) suggests the honours list.
To summarize: Congrats, TBL - for all the others (all but 2 or 3) - give me a bucket
(Arthur, England)
Every country in the world has a system to recognize outstanding citizens.
The British system may not be perfect, may require reform dus to its origins, but that does not make some of the people recognized fully deserving of an official celebration.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
This is the way the UK celbrates its citizens achievements.
The system is in dire need of a revamp, but being the only way available I think it is better than nothing.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Parent above is correct, the Queen does not choose any of the recipients of honours. They are chosen by 10 commitees of civil servents who put suggestions to an 11th committee to make final decisions.
Awards are not only given to famous people, but to people who make a difference and are the pride of the UK. My old headmaster has an OBE.
About the Queen using the internet for porn though, I know that's not true. She gets the Sunday Sport for her porn fix.
PHP
How could he be a Knight of the British Empire? There was no British Empire in those days, let alone a United Kingdom of Great Britain. The countries of England & Scotland were still seperation nations back then
Incidently AFAIC Queen Elisebeth II, should really only be referred to as the QEII of England - seeing as there was no previous QE of Great Britain, Scotland, Canada or Oz, she really should be referred to simply as QEI of those places (afterall James VI of Scotland is James I of England, so lets be consistemt with that precendent)
Look at the way they watch LOTR, use terms like Duke, Earl & Leroy as given names, & the way they're celebs will title themselves - 'the King of Pop' for instance.
Well, at least the picture depicting the NeXT cube is as big as the pic of Tim. It's shown on some kind of podium, so perhaps it was awarded, too : )
t m
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3357073.s
Please note: This is where you plug all those "Mac OS X / Steve Jobs rocks" posts in this thread.
Nothing, even if monkeys did blow out of people's arses and this did actually happen, they'd quickly find their tenants had a right to buy. Besides I'm not sure that they own the land personally - only as part of their position. Abolish the position and the "threat" would become irrelevant.
The award is really from the government, they draw up the list of honours from various sources. The Queen presents it as she is the current head of state, there are very few awards that the Queen personally gifts.
Is there some connection between these two facts?
The Irish Republic's "we're not Britain" complex is quite ancient and predates the idea of Britain; the Romans never reached Ireland and it retained a separate cultural identity despite a long history of efforts over hundreds of years to change it forcibly. And there's rather more to it than "no taxation without representation" Citizens of Republics are generally proud of the fact that the have no monarchy, no established church, and no hereditary privilege (all citizens are born equal--no "Lords" or hereditary peers). The Irish Republic is one such, like America. It would be FAR more accurate to say that American national identity is defined by a "we're not British" sentiment. The Christmas issue of the Economist had an interesting comparison between how well Kings and Queens of England++ (ie., and of whatever else they ruled at the time) stacked up against US Presidents. Guess who comes out on top! :-)
Anyway, the Republic of Ireland is an independent country. Get over it.
It was wildly successful and did the economy no end of good.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I sense that americans are in a sort of awe, giving to the title of Knight more weight than it deserves.
But britons certainly know that there are and have been many "Knights" that they wouldn't want to be associated with. Lord Archer, for one. And a whole host of showbiz people whose only mind was to get rich at the expense of art.
Sigged!
It's not cherished by everybody and technically the idea that it doesn't do much of anything is utter bollocks. Laws are not enacted without the Queen's assent. This is a matter of fact not of opinion. She is also the head of an established church. All citizens are not born equal. Etc.
See http://www.centreforcitizenship.org/home.html
Someday Britain will grow up and become a real democracy. The London Sunday Times has recently published a long list of people who have declined knighthoods and other Imperial honors. There is now a witchhunt to find out who leaked the list. It's a LONG list of very distinguished people.
blah blah blah
the british government is so stable and great
reality check:
IRA
FALKLANDS
and then this earlier post about the british leaving behind colonies in such a good shape (because presumabley they weren't as corrupt as the french). don't make me laugh.
to colonise was a bad idea in the first place. i'm dutch. i'm not proud of what my great great grandparents did when colonising indonesia et al. you shouldn't be proud of you conquests either. leaving them in a state which is acceptable in *your* opinion is no excuse from taking thier land and resources in the first place. this exploitation is exactly the thing that made the western world rich, and thereby relatively stable...
...a herring.
HTH HAND
I know a lot about technology and I hardly think the layman should know these guys names. How about Turing or von Neumann?
nohup rm -rf ~/. >& zen &
And don't say it!
Why was not Tim amongst them? Mmmh? Because he does fnot give a toss about fringe political issues?
Because he knows that the "British Empire" is a contraption with an empty meaning today and will take some time to be removed from British public life?
Because, unlike others posting here, he understands the spirit in which these honours are coveted in today's world?
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Good to see Knighthood now represented at MIT's innermost, by a Midknight Kommander no less!
Let's hope Gnighthood is next for RMS.
Although why the fact that TBL has got himself a night hood is deemed newsworthy eludes me entirely.
"Who Aboot"?!
He's British, not Canadian.
During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet
It is a lie. If you check on the actual dates, the Internet existed for several years before he got into Congress.
Al Gore made an honest claim about something that he was justly proud of. And somebody deliberately misquoted him to make it appear that he was claiming to have "invented the internet".
... right down there with Fox News and the National Equirer.
That "someone" who deliberately misrepresented what Al Gore said (and whose misrepresentation was then repeated by other, lazy journalists ad nauseum) would be Declan McCullagh of WiReD magazine, whose yellow journalism redefines the color yellow, and who enjoys enough of a rapport with slashdot editors to have his byline placed on any story of his slashdot links to (unlike, say, this story here, and just about every other story linked to).
He single handedly drew attention to the LiViD (Linux DVD) project by publishing a hysterical article about DVD pirates writing software (before it was even working, and knowing full well that the project wasn't about copying DVDs, it was about playing them on Linux, something one couldn't do back then. He subscribed to the mailing list, he knew exactly what he was doing.)
His career is littered with the destroyed public image of more people and projects than I can reasonably count, and his deliberate, premeditated sabataging of Al Gore by deliberately misquoting and misrepresenting him places him at the lowest level of journalism
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Al Gore made an honest claim about something that he was justly proud of. And somebody deliberately misquoted him to make it appear that he was claiming to have "invented the internet".
Gore made a false claim about something he had nothing to do with. Changing the word "create" to "invent" is an accurate paraphrasing: it is a lie either way. The Internet was created/invented by others years before Gore ever got to congress. Seriously: look up two years:
1) the date the Internet was created
2) the date Gore got into Congress
I've done it. Don't be lazy. You will find that Date 1 is way before Date 2.
I can assure you that Al Gore was the first person in the Senate to take it seriously
So? It still was created long before the Senate got involved.
It wouldn't be so annoying if this deliberate campaign hadn't been so successful at painting this honest (if dull) politician as a "liar", and possibly costing him the election (which was stolen anyway).
His own false claim made him a liar. And you also forget that he lost the election because he did not win enough votes in enough states to win the Electoral College. That must make you a liar, too.
Nope, Internet was originally called ARPA net in the beginning till it was changed in like mid or late 80s
The Internet name had been used for this existing network for years before Gore ever got involved.
And SIR PAUL, Kylie, Boy George, Guy Ritchie, Anthony Hopkins, Keith Richard, Charlie Watts, Bill Wyman, Peter Townsend, Jimmy Page, George Martin, Judy Dench, Billy Connolly, Sting...
Seriously: congrats to TBL.
Could someone please explain to me the British fetish for its Monarchy ?
It's a media fetish more than anything. Oh yes, there are many who care about the royals, but there are also many who find it somewhere between boring and nauseating such as ME! I'm sure not all US citizens have rushed out to buy the Jessica Lynch autobiography, but the media still went crazy about her.
All I remember of the Princess Di funeral is wanting to do my washing but the laundrette was shut because of it.
Anyway, on-topic, have a look at the number of people who want no part of the honours system. Good for them. I'd love the chance to turn down a knighthood.
Many people in Britain have no idea how little respect they have in many parts of the world. Most people in this country don't know anything about the Opium Wars, or where Britain sell arms to. Ask the average Brit about the occupation of India and you'll get some crap about how lucky they were because we gave them railroads.
I was born in North Wales, which is hardly the Heart of Empire, but I still wish I could distance myself from the history of this country more.
Royals? Bah! Long live the Revolution!
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
your a banana
the queen dosn't decide who gets the honours, ita a political thing. all the awards go through 10 downing street.
thats why you get spanners like beckham getting awards, it just the goverment brown nosing the public
Yeah, they should be thinking what they feel. I'm waiting for real emotion based tags like, "angry" or "loud" and "screaming at the top of my lungs" or "bloody murder".
Three cheers for Sir Tim. The squables petty people have over the details of his work don't bother him at all. He's happy that people are using the web the way he intended:
The original idea of the web was that it should be a collaborative space where you can communicate through sharing information. The idea was that by writing something together, and as people worked on it, they could iron out misunderstanding.
How your browser interprets the big thought above is mostly a function of how your brain works.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
That "someone" who deliberately misrepresented what Al Gore said (and whose misrepresentation was then repeated by other, lazy journalists ad nauseum) would be Declan McCullagh of WiReD magazine
... right down there with Fox News and the National Equirer.
The interview in which Gore falsely took credit for inventing the Internet was with CNN, not Wired. CNN still has it on their online trascripts, and it clearly shows Gore stating the lie.
misrepresenting him places him at the lowest level of journalism
Fox News? They dare to be balanced and accurate. Those who think that the media should only be left-wing (a la CNN) just can't stand this. You just don't get it.
Actually, when it comes to collecting taxes from me to pay for something, or when it comes to who has extraordinary powers in government and the courts, cold and logical suits me fine.
As an American, your head of state is George Bush, a man who I have little respect for. Nevertheless, he was elected (or at least had 40 something percent support). We don't get this choice. When the current Head of State dies, we get Charles Windsor, an utter numbskull who can barely dress himself in the morning. He'll be attending various official functions and acting as representative for our country.
Geez, you need to get over the "stolen election" idea. Every recount of the Florida ballots came out in Bush's favor.
That is correct. Gore lost every vote count before the Supreme Court decision to let the actual election stand. Gore even lost the count he had demanded of the Court.
The ONLY scenario in which Gore wins is if you decide to take the ballots that did not have votes on them and count them as Gore votes.
Prince Albert could just not face reality: he was not going to assume the through he thought was his through divine providence. The people and the Constitutional process had other ideas.
But what if you already had an 'e' at the end? ;)
Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
Whoy don't you go off somewhere and gently fuck yourself with a chainsaw.
You are a goddamn MORON.
Fuck you and your children.
I'm almost at the end of the /. postings and I don't believe anyone has mentioned anything about the NeXT cube pictured in the article. I'm reading a book right now called "How the Web was Born" (I think that's the title), and it's noted that TB-L used a NeXT cube to do his research/paper for the web on that NeXT cube. How much do you think that would fetch on e-bay?
i created gopher... do i get anything?
disqualifies everything else you said.There is NO evidence the election was anything but a narrow clean Bush victory.
Al Gore told lies when the truth would have served better he lied with no reason.That is wht his relationship with fact and the truth was described as "pathological" by those of his own political leanings in the press.
And that lawyer for that woman in Texas who burned herself on a cup of MacDonalds coffee.
Al Gore's achievement in programming his sympathisers into believing he somehow really won the election if you squint just right and don't count the votes of people in the Armed Forces ranks as the finest example of carnival hypnotism.
The ambulance chaser down in Texas....I praise his achievment everytime I sip from a lukewarm cup of coffee from any nartional chain takeaway restaurant.Cold coffee everywhere outshines whatever settlement he got for himself and his stupid bitch of a clirent.
I'd rather we had a proper constitution, checks and balances and all that
Just take the US Constitution. Works great, and we aren't using it anymore!
seriously she spread or kneeled for damn nearly everyone arabs,soldiers,stableboys etc.
What date are you using as the Internet's creation date when you say "The internet was created before Al Gore was even in office"?
I'm keeping my fingers crossed it'll be me this year. But I must admit Tim Berners-Lee would probably be a more worthy receipient. Well, today's the last day of the year, so let's hope the announcement's today...
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Does anyone have a gopher:// or ftp:// link to the story? I've been considering upgrading to this World Wide Web thing and now that both Mick Jagger and Al Gore appear to support it, it might be worth looking at in the new year.
Thomas Dz.
So, for example, someone called Tim Berne in 1950 would, if they were to bounce a cheque in 1962, miss a credit card payment in 1965, and then declare bankruptsy twice, would be called "Tim Berners-Lee".
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Suppose the Queen invited Alan Ralsky over to be knighted and suppose the sword slipped...
their position says that they own _all_ the British Isles (and presumably the remmnents of the empire)
there was a time when sir mick was persona non grata in england, not for his rock-n-roll lifestyle, but because he was failing to pay taxes on his millions...
http://smithsonian.yahoo.com/internethistory.html
The whole concept of knighthood is retarded and arcane. Give me a f-ing break. If some one works their ass off, they don't need a stupid queen to give them some stupid label. How about just give the recipients a big party, a grant and a simple thanks. There's no freaking need for retarded titles. I hope this TBL decides to reject the stupid knighthood and gets back to fixing all the damn problems with semantic web.
The US Medal of Freedom is roughly equivalent to this kind of knighthood. Here is a list of recipients in the past ten years. Intel founder Gordon Moore (of Moore's Law) is only computer geek on the list.
This may be controversial, but I think Bill Gates will eventually receive this for his charity work.
What "lie"? The one where he took credit for taking an initiative to create The Internet through the Senate?
Yes, that lie. You spelled it out quite clearly, and it is nothing but a lie, since the Internet existed before Gore ever got to the Senate.
The thing that Vint Cerf et al says is completely true?
You've not read the actual Cerf quotes. Cerf rightly thanks Gore for his help in growing the Internet after it was created. You will notice that Cerf actually overlooks Gore's lie. Even Cerf knows it was true; he and the real inventors of the Internet were working on it years before Al Gore ever got elected to Congress, and years before Gore lied by saying that he invented it.
Nobody used the word "Invented" or claimed Gore meant "invented" until McCullagh stuck his oar in.
Of course Gore meant "invented", as create means the same thing as invent in this context.
What Gore said was completely uncontrovertial until, as FreeUser and K8Fan say, Declan McCullagh reprinted the quote
He may have brought Gore's lie to public attention. However, Gore's lie is a matter of public record on CNN. This is where you find out that he lied, not Wired.
The Internet was created in 1969. This is long before Gore was elected as a Representative in 1977. It follows also that his claim of having invented it while in the Senate in 1985 is also false.
Gore did claim to have created it in the Senate. It is a minor technicality, since he did not create it as a U.S. Representative either.
Gore was instrumental in privatizing it and bringing it to schools. I will have to admit that 'took the initiative in creating the internet' is misleading. I understood what he meant, though
Misleading? It was an outright lie: it was invented before he ever got on the scene.
Changing it is not the same as creating it in the first place. Henry Ford did not create the automobile. Like Gore with the Internet, he built on what the actual creators did and changed and popularized it.
So, basically, what he said was a lie, but you are happy with the lie because you can make up "what he REALLY meant to say" out of imagination and claim that this non-quote is the truth.
You should hire yourself out to be a political spin man.
Did you know that the Internet had 111 nodes by the time Gore was first elected to Congress. Yet he said he "took the iniative" in creating it.... after he got to the Senate in 1985.
The guy's a boob. He has made other Zelig-like claims, including discovering the Love Canal disaster. Don't forget the speech in which he recalled a union song from his childhood.... a song not written until he was an adult. He builds his resume on myth.
There is "no controlling legal authority".
Of course, if you use an OS that doesn't make case distinctions, you might not understand the difference.
Case disctintion significance is actually a serious design flaw of *NIX.
There is no good reason that an OS. should treat
fooBar.txt
and
fooBAR.txt
as two separate files.
More mature, easy-to-use OS's allow for case distinction but are smart enough to find BOTH
fooBar.txt and fooBAR.txt
if you search for or open
foobar.txt
(I'm not really talking about Windows 32 bit here. The Amiga got this right early on, so did the Macintosh)
During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet. A statement that is, in fact, true.
You need to do a little basic research on Internet history. The statement is, in fact, false. as the Internet was created in 1969. This is years before Al Gore got into Congress.
Can someone postumously please do the equivalent the other side of the Atlantic for the late and great Jon Postel?
Phillip.
the british government is so stable and great
reality check:
IRA
FALKLANDS
------
Those things never threatened the stability of the government itself, just the stability of outlying regions. When I'm talking about stability, I'm talking about having no civil wars since the 1600s, and having the same gradually evolving Parlimentary system since 1688.
and then this earlier post about the british leaving behind colonies in such a good shape (because presumabley they weren't as corrupt as the french). don't make me laugh.
---------
I never said anything about the British colonies! I dislike the British colonial period moreso than most people, because my parents are from the sub-continent. But the fact that the British did some bad things abroad does not change the fact that they have a tradition of freedom within their own country. The United States grew and prospered through genocide and slavery. Those are regretable things that happened in the past, and do not change the fact that the United States has a deep tradition of freedom.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Actually, before you receive your knighthood, you have to renounce your native citizenship and are give English citizanship/knighthood. FACT!
I've always thought that the reason Diana made such an impact was because it made normal, everyday folk feel that they too could become 'royalty'. It's like hitting the jackpot, only the cultural roots of royalty being the "in" crowd goes back to antiquity.
of course, Diana's family wasn't exactly low-class, but they weren't highborn either (at least that's what I understand)
and the stink over her death came from the issue of whether or not the paparazzi caused the accident or not.
Famous socialist symbols: Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol-Pot. The worst mass-murderers in history are socialists. Even Hitler's "National Socialism" can be attributed to leftist views.
Socialists are against the Monarchy because it shows that people are not equal. Well, commies, people ARE different, and you'll just have to accept it. You'd want everyone to have the same amount of money, food, etc. But the rest of us - those who don't live in our own little fundamentalist fantasy world, are happy to let people who work hard get what they deserve. If you start off with empty hands and get rich, all the more power to you! Under socialist rule, you would never ever be rich or achieve anything.
Socialism is the ideology of mediocrity. Achievers are punished. Conformists are cheered.
Take a stand for achievements, against socialists who try to impose their twisted views on the rest of us! Socialists have no sense of history or tradition. Their only goal is to rid the world of excellence and pull us all into the mud of mediocrity.
LONG LIVE THE QUEEN!
Why did Jagger get knighted anyway? Because of his grotesquely disproportionate lips?
SEO Copywriter. Just Say ON
The communist pigs want to take out those who stand in their way with weapons. I SAY, TEST OUR RESOLVE, AND WE SHALL THROW YOU BACK, INTO THE SEA!
So shut the fuck up and fuck off, you communist pig.
While that may all be rightly true, they asked Al Gore what his biggest mistake was in a debate during the 2000 campaign. And his words were:
"Claiming that I invented the internet."
So if it's a misconception that you're all mad about people spreading, he's been spreading it, too.
Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
The Queen is a great representative of her country and people. The Queen can be an ambassador to further foreign interest in her country.
Guess what, the Monarchy brings in a lot of money. The Queen and her palace is a tourist attraction. She is part of Britain's history. Combine Britain's proud history with the continuation of tradition which leads to direct income through tourism and a sense of national pride.
Let me guess, you are a leftist/socialist and believe that we are all equal, regardless of our achievements? Well, let me tell you, tradition, history and national pride are far more important than your petty attempts to talk nonsense about an important institution in the UK.
Clever signature text goes here.
He did, however, have a big hand in creating the car as we know it today
There you turn it into an invalid comparison. "As we know it today" is a big change to the sentence. Gore said nothing of the sort.
The internet was not called 'The Internet' until sometime in the 80's, long after Mr. Gore had become a senator
No, the name first appeared for the 'Net in the mid 1970s. You are off by 10 years.
Saying you created something is not the same thing as saying you invented something
Yes it is. Look up the words before you make a bigger fool of yourself.
He didn't say he invented it or discovered it or pulled it out of his back pocket.
He did say he invented it. He did not say he pulled it out of a pocket, or a hat, or from the sky.
He said he took the initiative in creating the internet, which I understood to mean 'I took the initiative in helping to create the internet'
Since what he actually said is clearly a lie, you use imagination to try and make him say something he never said, which you think is true. However, even your alteration is not true. The Internet was created by the time Gore got to Congress.
He didn't do anything technical but if you don't believe that funding and shaping public policy are important, you should crawl out from under your rock more often.
Yes we ALL know that Gore had a very positive role in improving and expanding the Internet.... long after it was created. However, giving him credit for something he did does not excuse giving him false credit for something he did not do.
You can, however, give lots of people credit for helping to create it. Gore should be one of them.
He should not be, since it was created by others before Gore put pen to legislative hand.
You should hire yourself out to be Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh.
I could also cook for Emeril, paint for Martha Stewart, or spin for Dick Morris. But why even mention names that have nothing to do with anything? As for me, I think you should hire yourself out to P.T. Barnum. You keep repeating the same lie over and over. Go look at Internet FAQs, Gore's biography, and other sources. Check the years. These facts cannot be disputed.
Perhaps you are mentioning Rush is part of the lie "Gore never said this: Rush Limbuagh made it up". I actually have no idea what Rush Limbaugh said on the matter: my source for what Gore actually said is Al Gore in the CCN interview
There is no way Gore had anything to do with "creating" something that was well established and already had 111 nodes by the first time Gore got into Government.
He helped to create the internet as we know and love it. He didn't say he invented it.
He certainly did. Look up both words. Also, read Al Gore on the subject:
"When an audience member asked him what mistake he learned from the most, Gore quipped, "Claiming that I invented the Internet." "
Source: CBS News. It is from a March 2000 debate. Even Gore says he claimed to have invented it.
The entire problem with your case is that it is contradicted by Gore's actual words every time.
Bah! Fuck you, communist pig!
The Queen can be an ambassador to further foreign interest in her country
Where I come from, you are something of a traitor if you further foreign interests in your own country.
The Queen and her palace is a tourist attraction
You could do away with the monarchy altogether and still have the tourism. In fact, tourism would increase, as "private" areas of the palaces would now be opened to the public for tours.
Let me guess, you are a leftist/socialist and believe that we are all equal, regardless of our achievements?
I oppose the monarchy idea (although not rabidly), but I am not a socialist. I realize the fact that socialism has nothing to do with equality. Under socialism, society is extremely stratified, where rulers own everything and the people own nothing. Socialism is in a way the modern version of monarchy. Instead of being granted their powers by God, the socialist rulers are granted their powers by the "dialectic of history" and other Marxist pseudo-religion.
You can turn the "royals" into normal citizens, and still have your rich heritage and tourism money. Unless you really REALLY want to support the lifestyle of a callow jug-eared homosexual playboy. I'd like you look at Rome and Greece sometime. People go there because of what was left behind by the old rulers. They do not go there because there is still a person called Emperor ruling in Rome.
You are a fucking moron. Did you even read what you are responding to? Fuck off, commie pig.
"...the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved BIG MEDIA."
Tee-hee.
I can create a TCP/IP network, but I cannot invent a TCP/IP network
If there is only one TCP/IP network, it means the same thing. A better example would be some god "creating the Earth" vs "inventing the Earth".
Gore admitted it himself: in March of 2000, he said he made a big mistake when he said he invented the Internet. He used the word "invent".
In March 2004, Al Gore said that his biggest campaign mistake was claiming that he invented the Internet. He did use the word "invent" in his actual quote.
See? Al Gore knows what he said, and he knows it was wrong. He owned up to his blunder. Stop tearing apart Internet history and meanings of words in a spectacularly unsuccessful attempt to make a false statement he made in CNN appear true. It isn't. Al Gore knows it, but you do not.
This original statement perhaps contributed to why he lost the election. It was not "stolen"... unless you mean by Ralph Nader, who set out to be a spoiler and succeeded.
The statement itself isn't funny. What is funny is the parade of morons who come out to say "He did not say he invented it, and here is proof that he did invent it". Happens every time. They all missed the clue train. Al Gore left on it. You are still standing at the station.
Could someone please explain to me the British fetish for its Monarchy ? The government is now a constitutional democracy, so why is there so much homage paid to the archaic traditions and figureheads of the past?
The monarchy represents the aspiration of England (sorry Scots etc). Historically the crown was the way you measured how far you had progressed in society. You Americans use other less disguised measures; money or political influence; whatever.
It is historical bunk but it is still the case that certain classes in England will cringe before royalty. It is hard to understand why this should be the case but one minor reason is that the queen is nominal head of state, like the president.
You Yanks have all that to come; you may laugh but it is obvious from the way your society is stratifying. Power is becoming more concentrated, not more distributed; you figure it out.
This claim is clearly and demonstrably true, and has been endorsed by all major players involved with design and depoyment of the internet during that early phase. Who the fuck are you?
You mean, "It'd be funny if it weren't tragic".
Offtopic? I resent that! This was a troll. Or flamebait. Whatever. But a reference to Monty Python can't be called off-topic in a thread about TBL become a knight :-)
:-p
This response, however, is off-topic, which means it'll probably get modded as a troll or flamebait
Your obsolete understanding of how the UK government works suggests that you've been reading Lyndon LaRouche or L. Ron Hubbard. Amusing stuff, but not terribly authoritative.
he knows much that is hidden. quite.
ROFL
Okay. I have to step in here having heard 1st person from both Gore and Vint Cerf.
Gore is a liar (as are most politicians). I am not claiming he lied about the internet. I am claiming he lied about other things. He had the nerve to speak to a nationally accredited medical school and university which sits near Canada about how "well" the Canadian Nationalized Health Care system is working for them. We knew it wasn't. He lost my vote right there.
Vint Cerf has said publicly (where I was present) that Gore pushed through the legislation to get the funding to allow the internet to become what it is today. And I believe his Vint Cerf's actual quote was, "We would not have the internet without his legislative efforts. So he effectively *did* create it."
"Would you rather have a playstation addicted dork wearing a star wars t-shirt?"