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."
Canadian Cynic, canadian politics is less boring than you
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
Everyone should read the classic paper from Richard Gabriel that discusses this "good enough is best" in the context of lisp and unix. Although it's a little old now, it's still a good read even for those with no interest in lisp.
First, the British government isn't constitutional in the same sense as the US government - there's no single document called "the British constitution". The founders of the US followed the European rationalist tradition: decide how the country should be run, write it down and embalm it for all time. (Until you change your mind - France has had five constitutions in 200 years.) In contrast, Britain's constitution follows the empirical tradition: if it ain't broke, don't fix it; when it breaks, patch it. So the British constitution is a messy tangle of legislation, common law and long-standing conventions, developed over time in a piecemeal fashion. Sort of a "release early, release often" approach to constitutional law. If the British constitution is Linux then the US constitution is Mach. (And the Magna Carta is Unix, the European Convention on Human Rights is the BSD networking stack, and the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act was written by SCO. Enough of that analogy.)
The book Systemantics, reviewed on Slashdot recently, claims that loosely-coupled systems developed in a piecemeal fashion are more stable than well-designed, tightly-coupled systems. I don't know if that's true of constitutions, but Britain has had a relatively peaceful (if slow) development from feudalism to near-democracy. Compared with almost any other country on Earth that's remarkably stable - even Belgium had a revolution.
Second, I think you're wide of the mark when you say that homage is paid to archaic traditions. British people are (in my experience) rather skeptical and cynical compared to Americans. If we tolerate archaic institutions it probably has more to do with suspicion of anyone who wants to rebuild the country in his own image (*cough*Blair*cough*) than with veneration of the past. When I visit the US I'm struck by the number of flags on display and the generally jingoistic atmosphere (and not just in the last two years). Many people seem to treat the US constitution as a sacred text, so I wonder whether there isn't more homage paid to archaic institutions in the US than in Britain (although the institutions are somewhat less archaic).
- Ernest GellnerThis 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
You have to owe allegiance to the Queen, like Canadians and Australians
Actually, it's a no-go for Canadians, who are barred from accepting foreign honours. Just ask Terry Matthews and (especially) the notorious ex-Canadian Lord Black of Crossharbour.
What Canadians do have is the Order of Canada, which is essentially a knighthood without the titles (sir etc...). The Order of Canada is awarded by the Governor-General on behalf of the Queen of Canada, who just happens to be the same person as the Queen of England - who isn't allowed to bestow titles on Canadians. Simple, eh?
In other news, for a good review of the British honours system see here.
When you have nothing left to burn you must set yourself on fire
The thing that Vint Cerf et al says is completely true?
What Gore said was completely uncontrovertial until, as FreeUser and K8Fan say, Declan McCullagh reprinted the quote claiming it meant Gore said he "invented" the Internet. Nobody used the word "Invented" or claimed Gore meant "invented" until McCullagh stuck his oar in.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
The Internet name had been used for this existing network for years before Gore ever got involved.
Well, yes and no. The case of the first letter is significant here. The term "internet" was used in the ARPAnet community by the late 70's. But the term "Internet" was consciously introduced in the early 80's with a more precise meaning.
There were a lot of early writings that attempted to make a distinction. An "internet" was more or less what we now call a LAN or an "intranet", a collection of machines using one or more types of comm hardware, with IP used to make them all play nice together. There were (and still are) many "internets". Each may consist of a number of different (hardware) networks, but at the IP level, they can be treated as a single network. The IP protocol intercedes for the software to make the hardware networks interoperate.
The "Internet" was conceived as a top-level internet that connected all of them as a single world-wide network. This was significant not because it needed new technology, but because it was to be a permanent part of the world's communications, not under the control of any single agency or government. The significant innovation here was the idea of a permanent comm system with distributed, cooperating management.
People in academia had talked about this, of course. But by the early 80's, it really hadn't been done. There was a world-wide ARPAnet, yes, and lots of little internets in different organizations. But their interconnections were partial and transitory. I well remember the frustrations of trying to send email from within one company or school to someone in another. At that time, the UUCP email system was often much more reliable, because its store-and-forward approach didn't depend on routing and permanent connections. Even today, with much of the Internet using transient dialup connections, email depends on a store-and-forward scheme, and most home machines and portables can't put things on the web, because they don't have permanent connections. So the Internet with a capital 'I' still hasn't really been fully implemented.
Al Gore rightly deserves a lot of credit for funding development of "the Internet", which happened in the 80's. He can't take much credit for "internet" development, which happened mostly in the 70's.
Of course, if you use an OS that doesn't make case distinctions, you might not understand the difference.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.