Slashdot Mirror


Tim Berners-Lee awarded the British Order of Merit

MarsBar writes "The BBC is reporting that Sir Tim Berners-Lee has been awarded The Order of Merit, a royal award granted directly by the Queen. Previous recipients have included Florence Nightingale, Sir Winston Churchill, Bertrand Russell, Graham Greene, Sir Edward Elgar, Mother Teresa and Margaret Thatcher."

151 comments

  1. discussed it with my kids by bcrowell · · Score: 4, Funny

    I discussed this with my kids just now, and they agree 100% with the award. After all, this is the man who made barbie.com possible, as well as trollz.com, clubpenguin, and neopets.

    1. Re:discussed it with my kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      He also made this possible. Thanks, Tim Berners-Lee...

    2. Re:discussed it with my kids by GFree · · Score: 1

      This would be the first time I've ever see an apparent goatse link rate funny on Slashdot.

      Then again, it might not even be goatse, but I'm still too-damn scared to click. :)

    3. Re:discussed it with my kids by Faylone · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your fear is justified. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to drive nails into my eyes.

    4. Re:discussed it with my kids by CalSolt · · Score: 1

      Actually, posts containing goatse seem to be getting modded +5 something a lot these days.

    5. Re:discussed it with my kids by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      It's safe. It's the really cute and funny kitty cat picture that occasionally shows up on goatse-looking URLs.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    6. Re:discussed it with my kids by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      Actually, posts containing goatse seem to be getting modded +5 something a lot these days.

      Do you suppose that a goatse.cx reference getting modded 5, Troll would qualify as a sign of the apocalypse?

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    7. Re:discussed it with my kids by Kastar · · Score: 1

      That may be because it's a goatse link with "Re:discussed it with my kids" as the title.

    8. Re:discussed it with my kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You'll need to keep your eyes open in order to nail them, so follow the link to see how.

    9. Re:discussed it with my kids by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      I applaud the man. He's a true contributor. He helped make a significant change to the world.

      If he had patented his idea we'd be in a world of trouble or it would have been stolen and patented by Microsoft.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    10. Re:discussed it with my kids by rapidweather · · Score: 1
      Although it is possible, and certainly was with the Automobile and the Airplane, someone else might have come up with the idea sooner or later. Who would have known, that no matter how lofty the original purposes and goals were, the internet would evolve into a place where we could all find spirit-uplifting images like this one?

      And on those days when you just can't get some odd software you are working on to actually work as intended, you can turn to another hand-picked image like this one also, to give you a little bright spot to enjoy.

  2. Obligatory by Joey+Patterson · · Score: 0

    Arthur: What manner of man are you that you can summon up fire without flint or tinder?
    Tim: I... am an enchanter.
    Arthur: By what name are you known?
    Tim: There are some who call me... 'Tim'
    Arthur: ...greetings, Tim the Enchanter.

  3. Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's a travesty that a destructive bitch like Thatcher was placed in the company of Florence Nightingale, Sir Winston Churchill, Bertrand Russell, Graham Greene, Sir Edward Elgar, and Mother Teresa.

    The mind really boggles. The Queen should have known better.

    Our Bernie is worth it though. The web has been a very important marker on Mankind's road into the future.

  4. We all should know by now by the_kanzure · · Score: 5, Informative

    Internet != WWW.

    1. Re:We all should know by now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      okay, you just posted exactly the same thing I did and get modded up and I get modded down? I guarantee a british guy modded my post.

      No, you posted something retarded and he corrected you.

    2. Re:We all should know by now by SirSlud · · Score: 0

      are you for real?

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re:We all should know by now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, the Internet has been around long before the WWW. Without the Internet, there's no World Wide Web.

    4. Re:We all should know by now by SEMW · · Score: 2, Informative

      okay, you just posted exactly the same thing I did and get modded up and I get modded down? I guarantee a british guy modded my post. Hardly. To quote from your post:

      "The inventor of the world wide web has been awarded the Order of Merit"
      I can't believe someone would be ignorant/arrogant enough to actually name one person as the inventor of the internet The GP was correcting your apparent ignorance on the subject. Neither Tim B-L nor the article summary ever claimed he invented the internet, only the World Wide Web.
      --
      What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
  5. Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wish I could have seen this. Was Freddy Mercury there? He seems to have been keeping out of the news lately...

  6. Good for him... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Simply put, Sir Tim Berners-Lee is the Johannes Gutenberg of the Internet.

    His simple invention, and his polite, modest manner should make him the IT icon of our time. I wonder, though, how many people could even tell you what he's done or recognise him by his picture?

    Good for him. He deserves all the recognition that he can get.

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    1. Re:Good for him... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And, yes, before someone decides to educate me about (D)ARPANET, etc, I do know that there's more to the Internet than the world wide web.

      My point was that what Gutenberg did to the printed word (made it faster, easier and thus more accessible to all), Berners-Lee did to the online word (put together a system that made it simple to use and thus acheived the same feat).

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    2. Re:Good for him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Order of Merit, Schmorder of Merit.
      They oughhta make him an URL.

      (Yeah, it's an old joke. But it's still funny.)

    3. Re:Good for him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "I wonder, though, how many people could even tell you what he's done or recognise him by his picture?"

      Being unknown to the filthy masses is the mark of the true Engineer.
      Sales and Marketing types are popular, Engineers get shit done.

    4. Re:Good for him... by pipingguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.

    5. Re:Good for him... by rs79 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't get as excited about Sir Tim as perhaps maybe I should. It was Einer Stefferud who invented MIME which is really at the heart of http, and Brian Reid whose PhD thesis, SCRIBE, begat SGML which begat HTML. Sir Tim just put the bits together which seems to be to be another one of those inevitabilities.

      Stef also invented and ran the first mailing list and Brian is also responsible for the firewall, Alta Vista and the laserwriter among many others.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    6. Re:Good for him... by Slashamatic · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say that, it is just TBLs approach to the wide-adoption/reuse of his invention. In a way, the web could be said to be an outgrowth of many existing technologies (Gopher and the original hypertext), but it was so successful because all he did was not to seek patent or copyright protection, just lobbying for interoperability.

    7. Re:Good for him... by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well the key is, Sir Tim did a LOT to make it accessible. Sure some of the ground work was already done, namely: TCP/IP, SGML, MIME, etc.

      What Sir Tim and his team did is:
      - Created HTML, which was arguably much simpler than SGML (yes it also allowed some mediocre "designers" to also design pages, but ultimately it lead to greater adoption)
      - Created the HTTP protocol, which by far and large was the greatest "enabler" of the technology, ie allow anonymous access to the information held in a ordered and secure manner.
      - Still actively in charge of W3C, and creating new standards, largely without breaking old ones.
      - Helped begat XML.
      - Did not try and patent it.

      So his contributions are large, and he is still actively participating. More importantly, he didnt try to patent it, but freed it.

      --
      Have a nice day!
    8. Re:Good for him... by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 1

      Its a pity I don't have mod points, but if I did , I would definitely mod you insightful. Its very true that true success is often unnoticed, simply because it "works".

      --
      Have a nice day!
    9. Re:Good for him... by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

      Not to take anything away from Berners-Lee but Ted Nelson really deserves much of the credit for ideas that later became the web... for that matter so does John Brunner who was astonishingly accurate in his predictions of where computer technology was going... But I once heard Nelson use the phrase "psycho-acoustic tele-dildonics" 30 years before it became realized and for that alone he should be remembered... as well the creators of TRAC ought to be given some credit for what later became the web.

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
    10. Re:Good for him... by simong · · Score: 1

      Ted should never be forgotten, especially now when we need something like transclusion more than ever. However, Ted seems to have wandered back into academia, and progress on Xanadu and its associated technologies seems to have ground to a halt.

    11. Re:Good for him... by bkr1_2k · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think receiving the Order of Merit is most likely not just because of what he did but how he did it. It's a greater measure of the man that he did this for the good of others (with some personal gain for sure but not strictly for personal gain) and that's why he received an award that only 24 living people on the planet can hold.

      That puts him in very high regard and he should be. That said, I knew nothing about him until reading the article. Some people want fame and glory, others just want to do what they do and do it well. Some get both, most get neither.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    12. Re:Good for him... by Zeinfeld · · Score: 1
      Simply put, Sir Tim Berners-Lee is the Johannes Gutenberg of the Internet.

      As it happens the first time I met Tim in 1992 it was a couple of weeks after visiting the Gutenberg museum.

      Gutenberg didn't invent movable type either, but he was the first person to put all the different pieces together to create a system.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    13. Re:Good for him... by Any+Web+Loco · · Score: 1

      Being unknown to the filthy masses is the mark of the true Engineer. Ah yes. Like these chaps, all unknown in their time: Isambard Kingdom Brunel, Gustave Eiffel, James Watt, George Stephenson, Thomas Telford...
    14. Re:Good for him... by rise.and.sinh · · Score: 1

      That quote reminds me of W.H.Auden's poem, "The Unknown Citizen":

      This Marble Monument Is Erected by the State) He was found by the Bureau of Statistics to be
      One against whom there was no official complaint,
      And all the reports on his conduct agree
      That, in the modern sense of an old-fashioned word, he was a saint,
      For in everything he did he served the Greater Community.
      Except for the War till the day he retired
      He worked in a factory and never got fired,
      But satisfied his employers, Fudge Motors Inc.
      Yet he wasn't a scab or odd in his views,
      For his Union reports that he paid his dues,
      (Our report on his Union shows it was sound)
      And our Social Psychology workers found
      That he was popular with his mates and liked a drink.
      The Press are convinced that he bought a paper every day
      And that his reactions to advertisements were normal in every way.
      Policies taken out in his name prove that he was fully insured,
      And his Health-card shows he was once in a hospital but left it cured.
      Both Producers Research and High-Grade Living declare
      He was fully sensible to the advantages of the Installment Plan
      And had everything necessary to the Modern Man,
      A phonograph, a radio, a car and a frigidaire.
      Our researchers into Public Opinion are content
      That he held the proper opinions for the time of year;
      When there was peace, he was for peace: when there was war, he went.
      He was married and added five children to the population,
      Which our Eugenist says was the right number for a parent of his generation.
      And our teachers report that he never interfered with their education.
      Was he free? Was he happy? The question is absurd:
      Had anything been wrong, we should certainly have heard.

    15. Re:Good for him... by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      It's a quote from Futurama.

  7. Ok so? by jrwr00 · · Score: 1

    So this is the same guy that made the first website on the NeXt Cube right? if so illl give him cred for helping to start the WWW (World Wide Web) he started HTML over TCP/IP before that all you had really was BBS it was a major leap to have content with images, I forget did he help make Mosaic?

    I can see him going down is history as a great role is starting the WWW

    1. Re:Ok so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      reminder to drunk: don't post while self.

  8. Cheer the ol' anthem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    God Backup the Queen!

  9. TBL love-fest by penguinblotter · · Score: 0

    Man, the last time I came to visit Slashdot, almost the same story led. It's like I never left. Reddit be damned. news.ycombinator.com ? pfft. If I want the same old shit, I'll just come to ancient.slashdot.org and hear about this (admittedly studly) guy being knighted or getting the Order of Merit. Maybe you gots to be a Brit to get it. Seriously. What are the odds of the last two visits having a TBL love session?

    --
    Mind the gap
  10. Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This was meant at Thatcher, not Berners-Lee. Otherwise, not great company to have - one who destroyed prosperity in her own country.

    1. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Mother Teresa's not much better. Purely a media creation, she was considered an embarrassment in India. She had a bizarre kind of worship of death and suffering, and offered up kind words for brutal dictators as long as they donated to her weird sect. Yet she controlled her public relations so masterfully that most people think she actually helped poor people, which was something she never really spent much time on.

    2. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Brickwall · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not that you're an ignorant fool, but from 1975-1990, when Thatcher was PM, British GDP increased from 100,000 million pounds to 557,000 million pounds. That's about 11% per year on average, and far from "destroying prosperity", I think most countries would consider that pretty good economic performance. The changes she made made it more inviting for other companies to come and invest in Britain. For example, the company I was working for in 1979 when Thatcher came to power, Mitel Corp, built two plants in Britain. Later, when Terry Mathews left Mitel and started Newbridge Networks, he built more plants in Britain, creating thousands of jobs. I remember sitting in on a management meeting a few years after Thatcher came in, and Mathews was asked if he would have invested in Britain under a Labour government. He just snorted derisively and said "No".

      --
      What was once true, is no longer so
    3. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by HalfFlat · · Score: 1

      Those GDP figures do not take into account inflation. In 2003 pounds, the 1975 GDP was 577,489 million pounds and the 1990 GDP was 814,956 million pounds. That's an annual increase of approximately 2.3%. Or 2.2% if you look at per capita GDP growth.

    4. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not that you're an ignorant fool, but from 1975-1990, when Thatcher was PM

      Thatcher came to power in 1979, not 1975. Bear that in mind next time you call someone an ignorant fool.

      British GDP increased from 100,000 million pounds to 557,000 million pounds. That's about 11% per year on average, and far from "destroying prosperity", I think most countries would consider that pretty good economic performance.

      As another poster has commented, those figures don't take into account inflation, which reached 18% at one point. Also, between 1978 and 1983, manufacturing output dropped 30%.

      Later, when Terry Mathews left Mitel and started Newbridge Networks, he built more plants in Britain, creating thousands of jobs.

      I'm sure that felt great for the 3.6 million who were unemployed in the early 80s (more than three times the number unemployed under the previous Labour government).

    5. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's all right - the 3.6m unemployed were work-shy socialist scroungers who needed to be taught a lesson!

      Don't you remember the magnificent battle with the unions which no one could touch before Thatcher? She broke their power so comprehensively that they still haven't put their head above the parapet after ten years of Labour.

      And after Thatcher, Labour could only get into power by espousing Conservative policies. Her major victory was completely destroying the Left, who had take over most of the working class of the country, and she even kept the economy in profit while she did so.

    6. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by gowen · · Score: 1

      Labour could only get into power by espousing Conservative policies.
      Have you read Labours '97 manifesto? ... a national minimum wage, improving universal free-at-the-point-of-service healthcare, windfall taxes on big business, increased European integration.

      These are Conservative policies?
      The major Tory policy stolen was that indirect taxes get noticed a lot less than direct taxes, so you can pretend to be tax cutting when you aren't -- which is exactly what John Major did.
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    7. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      "Not that you're an ignorant fool, but from 1975-1990, when Thatcher was PM"

      Ummm - you later say yourself that she actually came to power in 1979 however the years you note were key to building growth in the UK. Not much to do with politics as you may suggest though;

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullom_Voe
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_crude
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_oilfield
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_energy_crisis

      you may wish to review what percentage of UK GDP North Sea Oil represented during Maggie's years ....

      Sure Labour was a dog wagged by the tail of the Trade Unions in the mid 70's but to try to say Maggie's policies "made the country" isn't very accurate.

    8. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "..Have you read Labours '97 manifesto?..."

      Uhh? That's two elections ago! Have you read Labour's '01 manifesto? or their '05 manifesto? All the items you specify would ensure that a party was unelectable today.

      If you want to cheat by cherry-picking an old manifesto, perhaps you should pick Marx's 1848 manifesto and claim that Labour still adheres to that? It is a measure of how far Thatcher has lead us that before she came to power that would not have been a stupid statement. Or perhaps Webb's Clause IV of 1917? That none of these exist any more is the measure of what Thatcher has defeated.

    9. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I'm sure that felt great for the 3.6 million who were unemployed in the early 80s (more than three times the number unemployed under the previous Labour government).

      And only a few hundred thousand more than the number unemployed today after ten years of Labour government. If you want to subsidise unionized dockers and miners, I believe Arthur Scargill has a party you might be interested in.

    10. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by meringuoid · · Score: 1

      Labour could only get into power by espousing Conservative policies.

      Have you read Labours '97 manifesto? ... a national minimum wage, improving universal free-at-the-point-of-service healthcare, windfall taxes on big business, increased European integration.

      Uhh? That's two elections ago!

      Correct. Now, when did Labour get into power, allegedly by espousing Conservative policies? Was it by any chance two elections ago, in 1997?

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    11. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      And how did she achieve this ?
      By selling off the state owned utilities, that WE had paid for through taxes for generations, with the resulting loss of public accountability.
      Now our water distribution network is owned by the international conglomerates, as is our power and others. Hardly any of our engineering companies are british owned, and even then, they are usually owned by finance houses (instead of professional engineers) so they are under the threat of downsizing/asset stripping/resale at the slightest downturn in share price. Greed is the name of the game, if you haven't got the latest consumer item, you're a nobody (in the minds of the proles). The majority of workers can't afford to buy houses because wages are low, and you can't get state accommodation because it's all been sold off.
      The health service is in meltdown, the money we have all payed in towards our pensions has all been used for other things, and we are driving wages down further by allowing massive immigration from eastern Europe.
      The worst part is, *she* started this, and when we all sighed with relief as labour were elected we were deluded. Labour has done nothing to halt the decline in social values but has continued to accelerate it, as well as dividing communities and flooding us with orwellian restrictions.
      Money is everything in this country, and you can blame thatcher for that - fair and square.

    12. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quit whining. Everywhere in the world, the Market is god, deal with it. Europe is privatizing everything and there's NOTHING you can do about it.

      Money IS everything, everywhere. Don't be so deluded to think otherwise.

      Workers can't afford houses. So what? It's not like workers are that important to a country's economy, which is the paramount concern for any government. The elite managerial class can afford them, and the elite managerial class is the one that counts. Managers cannot be replaced, workers can and will be. If British subjects won't work for the wages that are proposed to them, immigrants will.

      Pensions? Healthcare? It's not the State's fault if you're poor, get over it. Why should the State pay you when you're too old to work? Haven't you saved anything? Not our problem.

      This is the world you will live and die in, so learn to exist in it. If you can't, shoot yourself.

      Ah, yes. British. No guns. Well, stick a knife or nail file into your throat and slash hard.

    13. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by master_p · · Score: 1

      Thatcher and Reagan helped created the society of 2/3: 2/3 of the population living an average life, 1/3 living in poverty so as that the 2/3 are happy. But look where are we now: poverty is on the rise in UK and in USA.

      People with money will only invest if they can hold on to their money and multiply it. But is that good for the common folk? in the end, all money will be in the hands of the elite (as if it wasn't, but anyway).

      You can try seeing it this way: Earth is a closed system, so the value of its resources, including workers, is fixed. The value created from work is part of the value of the Earth's resources...therefore, when someone earns money, the money earned are taken from the pockets of someone else, or from the natural resources of Earth.

      Therefore, capitalism will ultimately fail, albeit more slowly than communism: in the end, everything will be at the hands of the few, and the many will suffer.

      We are seeing the first symptoms of this problem in economies like Germany, where consumption has fallen dramatically the last few years. USA's economy is based on consumption, but what will happen when the day comes that people will not have enough money to spend? when they wear the same old shoes and clothes for years, don't buy any electronic devices, don't buy new cars etc? the economy will go down, that's for sure.

      And don't say that "right now, USA's economy is healthy". There are certain tricks that are done to keep it that way. For example, imported goods get taxed, so as that local industries don't fail. Or the arms & weapons industry must keep selling their stuff in order to be prosperous.

      Under this light, Thatcher was successful only for the time period that she acted (from 75 to 90). But her plan was short-sighted in the long run, just like everyone else who things that capitalism can work indefinitely.

      I would pay my respects to the first guy who comes around with a system that can last millenia and bring prosperity to many generations. As it is right now, no economic system can exist for more than a couple of centuries, without brought down by revolutions and wars.

    14. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The '97 manifesto? The one that won them the general election? The one that they one after they'd dropped Clause IV?

      Sure, that wasn't an abandonment of traditional Labour ideals at all!

    15. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Correct. Now, when did Labour get into power, allegedly by espousing Conservative policies? Was it by any chance two elections ago, in 1997?"

      Well, famously, they got into power by NOT being Conservative. After the Sleaze Years, anyone could win an election by stating that they were NOT Conservative. And, if you recall, the comments in '97 were that Labout were pedalling light on their policies, and stressing that they were not John Major.

      In the two elections since, we tried to see what the base policies of Nu Lab were. Not being called Conservative worked for the first few years. But after that people wanted to see something. And when they asked, Blair came out with typical Conservaiive policies.

      Finally, he stole so much Conservative ground that Cameron had to pretend he was against Grammar Schools to get some diferentiation!

      So you have a point in that when they went for power they did not claim to be Conservative. It's probably more accurate to say that Labour got into power by being the Conservative party that the electorate wished they could elect. But to stay in power, they followed the Conservatives to the letter. Beyond a National Minimum Wage, none of their other manifesto promises have been kept. I would make a distinction between what they claimed in a manifesto, and what they actually did in practice.

    16. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by phlinn · · Score: 1

      1/3 in poverty? more like 1/8. It's a debateble whether the official measure of poverty overstates or understates the problem. I lean towards overstatement, due to everyone being materially better off. The official poverty rates were formed with an assumption about food being about 30% of expenses, which explicitly has changed. The standards are increased by the Urban consumer price index, but they have not actually gone back and recalculated things from the beginning, and the original assumptions aren't as good as you might hope.

      Incidentally, the earth is NOT a closed system. Economics is NOT a zero sum game. Two people engaging in trade can both be better off because of it.

      --
      "Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny! Free men pull in all sorts of directions" -- Havelock Vetinari
    17. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Thatcher] broke [the union's] power so comprehensively that they still haven't put their head above the parapet after ten years of Labour


      You don't live in London do you?

      The RMT, under the leadership of Bob Crow, seem to be continually holding London Underground to ransom for more and more pay. They always say it's about safety but it always get resolved with a pay rise. The RMT on the underground is as powerful as Scargill's NUM wanted to be. When they walk out London is plunged into chaos and they know it.
    18. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by gowen · · Score: 1

      It was abandonment of collective ownership, one of Labour's core principles.
      That doesn't make them Tories.

      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    19. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by gowen · · Score: 1

      Beyond a National Minimum Wage, none of their other manifesto promises have been kept
      Well, NHS investment is massively higher. You can dispute the results, but not the expenditure.

      Parliaments for Wales and Scotland? Not a Tory policy. Done
      Reduction in child poverty? Not a Tory priority, and not a Tory manifesto promise. Done.
      Reduced class sizes for KS 1 and 2? Done (see http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nscl.asp?ID=6065)
      Free education for all under fives? Done
      Do you want me to go on ... I could list half a dozen more, and I'm not even a Labour voter (haven't been since the tuition fee disgrace, which *was* a broken manifesto promise).

      Now you might argue that they were all bad things... and I've no interested in arguing with you. But that they've been done is uncontrovertible.
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    20. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by seriesrover · · Score: 1
      2/3 of the population living an average life, 1/3 living in poverty

      First of 1/3 of the country is not in poverty. Half the world can't fill a glass with clean water - THATS poverty.

      Look, the point of a capitalistic society is that predominantly you are responsible for your own well being within the laws that make society work. Part of that includes those that can't help themselves but not paying for those that wont help themselves. Socialism only works for a period of time until those creating the wealth leave where they get the fruits of their work rather than pay extortionate taxes.

      And all I hear about is how the tax breaks here in the US are going to the rich...yes, because they're paying the most in taxes. If you lined all citizens up and asked them to step forward who are 'net' giving to the country then the rich would be out way ahead. The top 1% richest people pay over 30% of the tax bill, the top 10% bay 65%. So my friend, if you want to get rid of say the top 10% richest then please be prepared to have just 35% of your income.

      Therefore, capitalism will ultimately fail

      And be replaced by what?

    21. Re:Apparently even /. has shifted right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How dare you suggest rich people pay more taxes!. Just goes to show you that people don't understand what a progressive tax structure means. People don't want a government they want a mommy.

  11. Re:holy arrogance! by SirSlud · · Score: 1

    Nice try on the troll. The inclusion of Al Gore was a little too much tho.

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  12. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by terrymr · · Score: 4, Informative

    You forget that Thatcher invented "soft frozen ice-cream"

    I kid you not.

  13. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Brickwall · · Score: 4, Informative
    Yes, she only broke the destructive unions that were impoverishing Britain, won a war that many thought was impossible to win, and was a staunch ally of the US in the fight against communist totalitarianism, despite severe criticism of that policy from the weedy left, who were all preaching detente and co-existence. Thanks in part to her help, over 100 million Eastern Europeans are now living free and better lives. Yes, what a loathsome witch.

    Twit.

    --
    What was once true, is no longer so
  14. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes wasn't her plan to win back the Falklands to land a couple of C-130s full of SAS Troopers on Stanley Airfield?

    Great plan that was......

  15. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by dbIII · · Score: 2, Informative

    She also probably stopped WWIII by convincing Reagan to actually talk to Russians instead of threaten them from afar. Stopping the incredibly expensive British nuclear energy program without stopping nuclear research was also a good move.

  16. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
  17. Look up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whining of conservatives notwithstanding, Slashdot *is* right. Besides the delusional anarcho-capitalist libertarians who use their ideology as an excuse to deny global warming and promote other idiocy, there's a fairly large portion of the usual Bush-worshiping Islamophobes.

    You have to dig pretty deep on the internets to find a real enclave of lefties. Even DailyKos is moderate-left, at best. There's always been a large, highly influential bloc of reflexive Democrat-defenders, for whom all criticism of their team is absolutely unacceptable. Markos himself is the anti-feminist. It's more recently been infiltrated by libertarians, Clintonites, and Ron Paulbots.

    The one place I've found sane, intelligent people (and the occasional amusing troll)? Glenn Greenwald's Unclaimed Territory. It's an unlikely blend of just about everyone opposed to dictatorship, but it rarely if ever descends into the same kind of swamp that every other forum seems doomed to.

    1. Re:Look up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the tone of your response, I take it you are quite misinformed of the virtues of the liberal.

      But otherwise an effective example of the pot calling the kettle black.

    2. Re:Look up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to dig pretty deep on the internets to find a real enclave of lefties. Even DailyKos is moderate-left, at best. There's always been a large, highly influential bloc of reflexive Democrat-defenders,


      I take it you are from the US?
      It would appear that only there would the Democrats be considered to be on the left as opposed to slightly less to the right.
  18. Meanwhile in other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Steve Ballmer was awarded the Iron Cross which he immediately threw across the room when he learned that Himmler was considering migrating the Reich's infrastructure to GNU/Linux.

    1. Re:Meanwhile in other news... by Kroc · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Ironically, it was IBM who sold the punched-tape based computers to the Nazi party, which helped make the holocaust possible; but they don't refer to that in their company history.

  19. Re:Yup, The Butcher is next to Berners Lee in this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It also doesnt help that her leadership made a tempest out of a teapot for an island.

    Well, if the UK were just giving away islands without a fight, I know which one I'd take...

  20. No, she merely had the nation pay for it in jobs. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Thanks in part to her help, over 100 million Eastern Europeans are now living free and better lives.
    Well, mind that Ronald "PATCO" Reagan did some heavy lifting to help on that one.

    Yes, she only broke the destructive unions that were impoverishing Britain
    No, she simply gave businesses the green light to sell out on their country, with hollow results. Same poverty, just swept under the rug, and with foreign knockoffs of tons of UK vehicles.

    The only thing that she did was to make the UK serve as a reminder of what happens when you institute such anti-domestic policies.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  21. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by dbIII · · Score: 1

    ally of the US in the fight against communist totalitarianism, despite severe criticism of that policy from the weedy left, who were all preaching detente and co-existence

    Hang on, you have that as the complete opposite of history - Thatcher was pushing for co-existance and talking Reagan out of war. What we got was Thatcher, Reagan and Gorby sitting down at the same table on multiple occasions and a peaceful solution that looks prety good to me from here a few decades on. The hard line imagined here would not have solved anything apart from a "mission accomplished" temporary boost at the ballot box.

  22. What no Diana? by dwater · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't see Saint Diana on the list. Strange that...

    --
    Max.
    1. Re:What no Diana? by Don_dumb · · Score: 3, Funny

      There probably was a nomination but Prince Philip had it killed. Or at least that is what Mohammed Al-Fayed will claim.

      --
      If this were really happening, what would you think?
    2. Re:What no Diana? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is Philip the one with the big ears ?

    3. Re:What no Diana? by bishopjoey · · Score: 1

      That might have to do with the order being limited to 24 *living* members. Keep in mind St. Diana wasn't exactly on the Queen's top 10 list at the time she died.

    4. Re:What no Diana? by dwater · · Score: 1

      > That might have to do with the order being limited to 24 *living* members.

      Aha :) That'd do it...

      Of course, the other bit was the whole point in my post - if it could be said to be a point...pointless, more like.

      --
      Max.
    5. Re:What no Diana? by maroberts · · Score: 1

      You're thinking of Charles. (unless he inherited them from his paw)

      --

      Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
      Karma: Chameleon

  23. Re:No, she merely had the nation pay for it in job by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Hmm, the Tom Clancy dedication - Ronnie, the man who won the war has a fan it appears. In hindsight now that we have the soviet documents about how their empire was falling apart the Stategic Defense Initiative and other attempts to provoke some military action in the cold war were an expensive, dangerous and counterproductive sideshow with a variety of corrupt profiteers feeding off the edges while contibuting toys that did not work.

  24. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Brickwall · · Score: 3, Informative
    Hang on, you have that as the complete opposite of history - Thatcher was pushing for co-existance

    Well, the following is from Wikipedia, so you can take it with a grain of salt if you like:

    On 19 January 1976, she made a speech in Kensington Town Hall in which she made a scathing attack on the Soviet Union. The most famous part of her speech ran: "The Russians are bent on world dominance, and they are rapidly acquiring the means to become the most powerful imperial nation the world has seen. The men in the Soviet Politburo do not have to worry about the ebb and flow of public opinion. They put guns before butter, while we put just about everything before guns."

    Also from Wikipedia:

    n the Cold War, Mrs. Thatcher supported United States President Ronald Reagan's policies of deterrence against the Soviets. This contrasted with the policy of détente which the West had pursued during the 1970s, and caused friction with allies who still adhered to the idea of détente. US forces were permitted by Mrs. Thatcher to station nuclear cruise missiles at British bases, arousing mass protests by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.

    However, I will agree with you that when Gorby came to power, she famously said "He is a man we can do business with". But perhaps she sensed that Gorby was a man who could be talked into the sort of reforms that were needed to break up the Soviet bloc. I'm not on intimate speaking terms with the lady, so I'll never know for sure.

    At any rate, I never suggested she wanted to go to war with the Soviets, just that she wanted to put up a strong front againt them, while practically every other country in Europre was begging to make some deal with the Soviets that would have kept the entire Warsaw pact intact.

    --
    What was once true, is no longer so
  25. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LMAO. Go back and see what Thatcher really did - put millions out of work, declared there was no such thing as society, deliberately started wars and destroyed british industry. If I had a time machine she's be one of the first babies to be forcibly aborted.

  26. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by dbIII · · Score: 1

    I was reading the newspapers at the time and paying attention. Reality has ended up a little different to what you have described - hence the lack of a war at the time in Eastern Europe. What she did would be seen as "appeasement" by hardliners that forget that you do not have to give away your country to talk to those you disagree with. There was no fighting, there was negotiation.

  27. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I don't think there's debate about whether Thatcher was good for the economy.

    Most debate is centred around whether this outweighs the things it took to achieve it: increased police powers, reduced personal freedoms, CCTV culture, greed culture, privatisation of swathes of industry and transport infrastructure. The iron lady certainly took her toll on cultural britain.

  28. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by gowen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    was a staunch ally of the US in the fight against communist totalitarianism
    And an equally staunch ally of South Africa in the fight against racial equality.
    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
  29. I can't help but wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Why a man like Tim Berners-Lee, who has done more than practically anyone is history to improve the exchange of information between human beings would accept honors from the nobility, not once, but twice.

    Thanks to Sir Tim Berners-Lee, KBE, OM, I now know a lot more about why I'm a Citizen and not a Subject than I ever learned in school.

    Note to the Commonwealth of Nations and the United Kingdom--abolish the monarchy. No man or woman is inherently superior to another by accident of birth.

    1. Re:I can't help but wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Note to the Commonwealth of Nations and the United Kingdom--abolish the monarchy. No man or woman is inherently superior to another by accident of birth."

      Well, we're all born in the UK, and we're all inherently superior to y'all USians.....

      If nothing else, we're superior in understanding words. It's obvious that some people are superior to others by accident of birth - compare an athelete with someone who is born disabled. You probably didn't mean that. When you can tell me what you meant, I'll tell you where you were wrong!

    2. Re:I can't help but wonder... by OutSourcingIsTreason · · Score: 0

      What nonsense, there's a lot more to a person's worth than athletic ability.

      --
      "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Mussolini
    3. Re:I can't help but wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US has a noble class, you just don't recognise it as such. At least if everyone called her Princess Hilton, or him Prince Kennedy (any of them!) it would be up front. As it is now they're "normal" people...who happen to be treated as a superior through an accident of birth!

    4. Re:I can't help but wonder... by Warg!+The+Orcs!! · · Score: 1

      At least with a Constitutional Monarchy...

      1. our businesses don't have to spend so much money on bribes
      2 our politicians aren't owned by oil companies and
      3 they are able to represent the people who elected them and aren't afraid to pass inconvenient laws.

      --
      Travelling forward in time at a rate of 1 second per second.
  30. And don't forget T S Eliot by Flying+pig · · Score: 4, Informative
    T S Eliot also got the OM. For those who don't know (this is after all Slashdot) he was the New Englander who came to England, published some enormously influential poems (The Waste Land, Ash Wednesday, Four Quartets), wrote religious plays that actually turned a profit and still get performed, but above all was a hard working director of Faber & Faber, the literary publisher, and had a lot to do with making it a very successful literary publisher. And he was no religious fundamentalist: his religious writings are a million miles from the awful stuff in "Christian" bookshops and he was as likely to be writing about Hinduism or Buddhism as the Bible.

    The point being, that Berners-Lee is actually in much better company than the list given in the introduction might have suggested, and this award extends beyond the British gene pool to Americans like Eliot and Anglo-Americans like Churchill.

    --
    Pining for the fjords
    1. Re:And don't forget T S Eliot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More importantly, his name spelled backwards almost says "toilets".

    2. Re:And don't forget T S Eliot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Churchill was NOT "Anglo-American". He was a Spencer-Churchill (a very old and famous British aristocratic family,) who dedicated his entire life to the service of Great Britain. His mother was BORN in America (Miss Jennie Jerome, later Lady Randolph Churchill), but he found the emphasis placed on that fact by the American press during the war very distasteful. He would have considered it an insult - he was a fierce patriot.

    3. Re:And don't forget T S Eliot by GauteL · · Score: 1

      "The point being, that Berners-Lee is actually in much better company than the list given in the introduction might have suggested, and this award extends beyond the British gene pool to Americans like Eliot and Anglo-Americans like Churchill."

      I find it very amusing that you suggest that Churchill is somehow "beyond the British gene pool".

      Yes, Churchill had an american mother (of english descent), but he was born and raised in England (at Blenheim Palace no less) and his father, Lord Randolph Churchill, was from the Spencer Family (notably the same family as Princess Diana), and third in line for being the Duke of Marlborough.

    4. Re:And don't forget T S Eliot by notjim · · Score: 1

      and while we are not forgetting people, what about Michael Atiyah, one of the two or three most important mathematician of the second half of the C20.

    5. Re:And don't forget T S Eliot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...beyond the British gene pool to Americans like Eliot and Anglo-Americans like Churchill..."

      There IS a British gene pool. There is no such thing as an American gene pool, unless you count native Americans. Almost all American ancestry comes from elsewhere - how can it not? We expect some 1000 or more years of breeding - America only really finished murdering the Indians 150 years ago. Churchill's lineage on his mother's side was from the Huguenot Timothy Jerome, who went to America in the 1700s. Everything born in a stable isn't a horse!

      Americans are people who are trying to reject their ancestry and home country, and live a historically impoverished life as a result. Perhaps that explains why they try to kill every body?

      Incidentally, you claim Eliot as a 'New Englander'. Yet he took British citizenship. Does your argument mean that, for instance, that Einstein should no longer be considered an 'American' scientist?

  31. Re:Yup, The Butcher is next to Berners Lee in this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every prime minister is given an honour after his/her term in office ends. John Major was made a Knight of the Garter (and also made a Companion of Honour); so was James Callaghan (he was also given a life peerage), and Harold Wilson before him. In fact the tradition is to give former prime ministers a peerage (Margaret Thatcher in fact received one - so she is Baroness Thatcher and sits in the House of Lords), but in the past few decades, becoming a member of the House of Lords has lost its appeal to many politicians.

    In other words, Thatcher receiving the Order of Merit is not really a reflection of her personally - it's just a tradition that has been happening for many decades, to recognize the former prime ministers. After Tony Blair steps down this month he will eventually receive an honour - maybe Knight of the Garter, maybe Order of Merit, maybe even a peerage.

  32. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by hoofie · · Score: 1

    Well done - another muppet who's quite happy to make puerile assertions without having the bottle to put their login id against it.

  33. Re:No, she merely had the nation pay for it in job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    USSR really did try to match purported US military achievements, and it really did cause budgetary problems. For example, the US Space Shuttle was sold to Congress as a dual military & scientific platform with extraordinary capabilities (low cost, under 2 month turnaround time, etc.).

    When the Politburo heard the specs, this raised a red flag, so to speak, and they demanded that the USSR build something at least as good. But of the course the Shuttle design was way oversold. It does have unique abilities, but it is also incredibly expensive... but while the US can afford to waste that kind of money, the USSR could not.

    It was the same story with spy satellites, nuclear submarines, fighter aircraft, supersonic bombers, and more. The harebrained ABM schemes (pop-up missile defense, brilliant pebbles, orbiting muon beams, nuclear-bomb-pumped X-ray lasers, ...) were the icing on the cake. I don't know if there was actually a clever scheme to embarrass and bankrupt the USSR, but nevertheless the policies did have that effect.

  34. previous recipients.... by silver · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Previous recipients have included Florence Nightingale, Sir Winston Churchill, Bertrand Russell, Graham Greene, Sir Edward Elgar, Mother Teresa and Margaret Thatcher."

    Damn, talk about the odd one out!

    --

    Silver

    1. Re:previous recipients.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mother Teresa? Yeah, absolutely. I always thought she was a little shady.

    2. Re:previous recipients.... by tryfan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeay, I was really surprised to see Thatcher among those nice people!

    3. Re:previous recipients.... by lysse · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yes, my immediate response was "How the hell did that bitch get one"? I didn't even realise Mother Teresa was eligible.

    4. Re:previous recipients.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Mother' Theresa's Christian Missionary organization rakes in millions of dollars in charity for conversion to 'save the pagans' and
      preach that Jesus in the only way. The c*nt did not even allow simple analgesic medicine for cancer patients raging in pain.
      You see, for her, suffering is something which ordinary people should bear stoically. After all, didn't the Lord suffer for your sins?

      The Nobel Prize and umpteen other awards are an effective marketing tool of the missionaries plying their trade in poorer nations.
      Read, Hitchens, "The Missionary Position" for in-depth info.

  35. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by hoofie · · Score: 1

    I think the plan [Operation Mikado] referred to landing a C130 onto an airfield [Rio Grande] in ARGENTINA and then attacking the aircraft, which were being used to lauch Exocets, and kill all the pilots. When it was presented to the SAS, it was remaned "Operation Certain Death". I remember reading one sergeant and one other point-blank refused to do it, understanding full well that such a mission would be plain old suicide. [You don't put 55 SAS troops into that kind of situation, they are too valuable. And it should be made clear that SAS members are not exactly known for cowardice...]. Both men were kicked out of the SAS for this.

    After that the mission was slated to go ahead, but was eventually shelved after a recon helicopter landed short due to bad weather and had to be torched whilst the lads on board legged it into Chile. If it had gone ahead, I don't doubt that the men would have destroyed every single aircraft, missile and pilot on that base, but at a terrible cost in lives. Also, the Argentinians would have wasted NO time in telling the world that UK forces had invaded Argentina, etc etc.

    Sorry I can't find a detailed reference to it, it was buried in a book by an ex-SBS or SAS trooper and it's not a well-known facet of the war. The plan itself wasn't Thatcher's, it was Admiral Lewin's.

  36. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Worked on" rather than "invented", and the best known brand of soft ice cream was, of course, "Mr Whippy". Very appropriate, and an indication that those were simpler times.

  37. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by spectrokid · · Score: 1

    I 'd say she cured the disease but nearly killed the patient. Of all my (Danish) companies factories, the UK one is still the one with the most problems because of the negative influence of their unions. Hard handed cleaning was necessary. But Thatcher also paved the way for disasters like the privatization of British Water and the total underfunding of British Railway system. At one time she closed coal mines which were still profitable, just to break the power of the mining unions. That, in my book, is a bridge too far.

    --

    10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

  38. Re:holy arrogance! by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 1

    No, but, if Al Gore's work directly starts translating to a reduction of CO2, and in the future his efforts are seen to have really made a difference, he would indeed be eligible. His crusade against Global Climate change has been there for 30 years.

    --
    Have a nice day!
  39. Re: Tim Berners-Lee & the British Order of Mer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're discussing it here.

    Try not to be so overt when you're shilling your crappy webshite.

  40. I can see the ceremony now .... by amias · · Score: 0, Funny

    "i dub dub dub thee sir berners lee"

    as you where .....

    Toodle-pip
    Amias

    --
    [site]
    1. Re:I can see the ceremony now .... by bkr1_2k · · Score: 2

      ha, took me a second. I'm surprised someone has modded this up. Someone has to find this funny. Come on mods, let's give a little love here.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
  41. Agh, bollocks! by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    Do you remember gopher, do you?

    Or even ftp using a browser.

    the http:/// is not casual. it simply wasn't clear back then that you would not need to specify the protocol used in the future.

    The idea of linking documents in a computer network was revolutionary and in spite of all the flash and youtubes and what have you, that simple idea is the core of the Internet as we use it today.

    THe disparate bits and pieces to create it where all around the place but it took the ingenuity of Sir Tim to put all those bits together in a stroke of simplicity and genius.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  42. Re:No, she merely had the nation pay for it in job by mike2R · · Score: 4, Informative

    The only thing that she did was to make the UK serve as a reminder of what happens when you institute such anti-domestic policies.

    Why don't you move to France? You could discuss the merits of protectionism with the locals in the dole queue.

    The unions were out of control, even the last labour government had tried to reign them in - only to be humiliated. Brutal, yes it was. But it only needed to be quite so brutal because the idiots of the previous decades protected massive nationalised companies from real competition. Thats what killed British industry, decades of protectionism that left us with manufacturing industries that hadn't a hope of competing globally. Thatcher just convinced the corpse to lie down, and IMO this was her greatest acomplishment.

    --
    This sig all sigs devours
  43. and expressing the links by spage · · Score: 1

    Continuing in the same vein, not only did HTML/HTTP/URLs link nodes across a network together, it also made the links apparent. There were all kinds of hypertext systems in the 1980s (Hypercard and Notes blew my mind, and OWL and Folio had great insights too) and there was SGML, but when Sir Tim came up with

    <a href="some protocol:a host/path/to/resource?some action">the link text<a>

    he changed everything. It's easy enough that several million people have Learned It In 21 Days and figured out how to put it in their own documents and programs, and now we're here. Anyone who claims that because analogs of the parts were around, Sir Tim's synthesis isn't earth-shattering, is deluded. He's by far the most significant person alive.

    --
    =S
    1. Re:and expressing the links by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      "Sir Tim's synthesis isn't earth-shattering, is deluded. He's by far the most significant person alive."

      Oh BS. Far more significant to the internet was email. If it hadn't been for that it would have been a complete non starter outside very specialised areas. As for TBL being the most significant person alive , I think you need to re-adjust your set. The Web isn't even close to being a daily relevance for the majority of the worlds population and even in the west a large proportion of the population couldn't care less about it. Most significant person alive , jeez , get a grip... Try looking up the names of some doctors who are battling diseases , or engineers who are helping design more efficient engines or 101 other things. Not some guy who made it possible to skip around some pages of text and pictures via a network connection. BFD.

    2. Re:and expressing the links by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 1

      As for TBL being the most significant person alive , I think you need to re-adjust your set. The Web isn't even close to being a daily relevance for the majority of the worlds population and even in the west a large proportion of the population couldn't care less about it. Most significant person alive , jeez , get a grip... Try looking up the names of some doctors who are battling diseases , or engineers who are helping design more efficient engines or 101 other things. Not some guy who made it possible to skip around some pages of text and pictures via a network connection. BFD.

      Well, those doctors and engineers don't exactly work in isolation, do they? Yes, there have been peer review texts around for centuries but there's no doubt that the web has made research on all levels easier to conduct by facilitating faster flow of information.

      Gutenberg didn't print any "magic" new text. His bibles had the same content as other bibles of the time. Gutenberg's magic was the process, which made things faster, cheaper, and thus revolutionised access to and availability of the printed word.

      The web (way more so than any other portion of the Internet) has done the same thing for the digital word, and that's it's magic. Hence the grandparent poster's assertion, which, I think, you dismissed rather without considering the true merits of his argument.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
  44. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by basingwerk · · Score: 0

    She was the most gullible Prime Monster they ever had. Reagan and Kohl outsmarted her at every turn. They all decided to cut back on subsidies to heavy industry, but only Thatcher went ahead. Reagan and Kohl did nothing, and the US and Germany still have their manufacturing base. Poor old Blightly lost everything but its accountants! Now all the kids want to be marketing managers, but they have nothing to market, bless them. Berners-Lee left for America a long time back.

    --
    I stole this .sig
  45. Such great people by ivalladt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can hardly say if I'd prefer to share a merit with Bertrand Russell or with sir Edward Elgar. Such great people!

  46. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by segedunum · · Score: 1

    Yes, she only broke the destructive unions that were impoverishing Britain
    The trade unions needed sorted out, but she did it by destroying the working class and throwing away, and literally flooding, the best natural fuel resource we had - coal. Britain's coal is pretty much the best there is, and now all the pumps in the mines have been turned off, they're flooded and we can never get them back. We are now paying for that badly in terms of where our energy is going to come from in the next few years. Thatcher thought it was a fantastic idea to burn gas, which has a large volume, in something as hungry as power station to produce electricity. Great idea.

    won a war that many thought was impossible to win
    If you mean the Falklands, it was a war that never needed to be fought. Economically and politically, Argentina was in a mess, so a good war as an attention distraction didn't go amiss. As for Thatcher, she had an election to win ;-).

    Thanks in part to her help, over 100 million Eastern Europeans are now living free and better lives.
    The Eastern bloc countries, former communist states and Russia are in a diabolical economic state as far as ordinary people go. The only thing that's propping up Eastern Europe right now is European Community membership and European Community money. Once the big European countries see that as the threat that it is, Eastern Europe will be sent right back to the Communist age.

    I wouldn't call someone who is sceptical of Margaret Thatcher a twit if I were you. They have every right to be so.
  47. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by 0123456789 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but what war did Thatcher deliberately start? I'm not a particular fan of Thatcher, but there are more than enough facts out there about her that there's no need to fabricate criticisms.

  48. somebody set him up the BOM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    somebody set him up the BOM

  49. Re:Awards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeed. Granted I think one of your great ancestors x 600 back in the stone age may have killed someone over their wheel invention. So I think I'll take what you say with a very small grain of salt, too.

    (btw, you can translate that into a *yawn* at your post)

  50. MIME at the heart of HTTP? by Viol8 · · Score: 1

    Excuse me? MIME might be an important part of HTTP but is its certainly not at the heart of it. You could run a complete , albeit simple webserver without ever sending any mime information in the headers simply by using plain HTML or text.

  51. Margaret Thatcher by hotsauce · · Score: 1

    And Margaret Thatcher is the Ronald Reagan of the United Kingdom.

    Couldn't they just name an airport after her, instead of sullying the award?

  52. will lightning strike twice? by peter303 · · Score: 1

    A few pioneers like Jobs, Gates, and the YouTube guys have had second and third megahits. Im stil waiting for Tim's encore.

  53. New grounds covered today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  54. Re:Awards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "from the Queen who gained here position by murdering, invading and generally creating misery historically"

    Wow. You really have something against the Queen of England, haven't you? What happened to you?

    Were you beaten up in school by a Brit? Did he steal your lunch money? Did he shit on your face?

    Crushed your self-respect hard, didn't he? I bet you cried for weeks. Does it still hurt?

    Do you hate everything British now? Can't even bear to speak the language properly?

    It must be terrible to live like you do. Have you considered suicide?

  55. Where are the links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To properly honor Tim Berners-Lees the BBC article could at least have used a link to two...

  56. Re:No, she merely had the nation pay for it in job by phlinn · · Score: 1

    Given the combination of France and protectionism in one post, I am compelled to link one of the great ant-protectionist essays.

    --
    "Pulling together is the aim of despotism and tyranny! Free men pull in all sorts of directions" -- Havelock Vetinari
  57. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thatcher propeled the economy into the XXI century and Tony Blair kept it at the forefront of Europe.


    If you ask me the only thing either of these two [we|a]re any good at was propelling their own image and keeping themselves on the front pages.
  58. NOT the "web-inventor" by mi · · Score: 1

    Simply put, Sir Tim Berners-Lee is the Johannes Gutenberg of the Internet.

    Although widely believed to be such a person, Tim can only be called "the inventor of WWW", if we really need to identify a name with each concept — he didn't think of anything, not immediately obvious to anyone skilled in the art. Even then, we should be crediting the inventors of Hypertext, which existed long before Tim's work — if we can identify them, that is. The hypertext system, which Tim built at CERN, did not even use multiple servers.

    His simple invention, and his polite, modest manner should make him the IT icon of our time.

    Yes, manners and politeness would certainly help anyone. Being brilliant goes a long way too. But there was nothing, for which a patent could justifiably be issued — and only that qualifies as "invention" in my opinion.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  59. Its Horse Crap by corifornia · · Score: 0

    This Internets thing is completely useless.

    --
    crap.
  60. Hey mods, suck my salted chocolates... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...of the Russel Stover's variety, lol.

  61. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well excuse us for not trying to build an internet reputation. I'm sure yours is very important to you.

  62. Re:Awards by Smuttley · · Score: 1

    errr wtf?

  63. Re:Margaret Thatcher!!!!!!! FFS ... :-( by basingwerk · · Score: 1

    You appear to have missed a Conservative PM called John Major, who governed from 1990 to 1997. Are you sure you know much about British politics?

    --
    I stole this .sig