Slashdot Mirror


A Look At the "Information Superhighway," As It Looked In 1985

jfruh writes "AT&T's video library is a treasure trove of future-looking films from the past, and this one is no exception. Combining what might be the first on-film use of the phrase 'information superhighway' with predictions of Siri-like services and sweet '80s computer graphics, this offers a valuable look at how close we came to our past's future."

241 comments

  1. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    You're retarded if you think XP had anything to do with it.

    Seriously, what's with the quality of posts here these days? I need to quit reading, but habits are strong...

  2. Also recommended: Douglas Adam's Hyperland by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://archive.org/details/DouglasAdams-Hyperland

  3. Sort of a let down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    For a video made in the 80s, there is a dearth of embarrassing haircuts and/or clothes.... Come on 1980s!

    1. Re:Sort of a let down by lorenlal · · Score: 2

      But they did manage to include that embarrassing quote "If cars advanced as much as computers." Of course, he neglected to mention the whole part about how "it would randomly stop working, we'd have to restart it, and we'd think it was totally acceptable."

    2. Re:Sort of a let down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was perhaps the origin of what became a Bill Gates joke... "Bill" repeated what the AT&T guy said, then the GM guy came back and reminded him about blue screens and rebooting six times a day.

      (For the younger crowd who didn't experience it, 16-bit Windows was almost hilariously unstable and only succeeded in the marketplace because Mac OS at the time was no better. Most users of Windows 3.x and Windows 95 had to deal with regular system and application crashes, often several per day).

    3. Re:Sort of a let down by EdIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ahhhh.. yes Windows 3.x. The reason the reset button was moved to the front of the machine.

      No seriously. It used to be a big red momentary switch on the back.

    4. Re:Sort of a let down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they did manage to include that embarrassing quote "If cars advanced as much as computers." Of course, he neglected to mention the whole part about how "it would randomly stop working, we'd have to restart it, and we'd think it was totally acceptable."

      People do, they just don't realize how much they put up with in their vehicles.

      Seriously, that flippant response while rhetorically working on emotional terms, fails when you look at it logically.

      Most computer crashes? About as inconsequential as the cylinder misfiring or the windows not opening smoothly. Or the door jams not fitting. For the people who needed things to run smooth, they ran smooth. Most people were just not going to bother with that. They wanted something cheap.

      So they paid the price.

    5. Re:Sort of a let down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently you're also in the younger crowd or have forgotten the state of the hardware in the day.

    6. Re:Sort of a let down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that was prior to Windows 3.x. 2.x or 1.x maybe. I got a 386 in 1988 or 1989 and it had it on the front, but we didn't get a mouse for at least a year, by which time it was a logitech mouse bundled with a 'logitech edition' of windows 3.0. Had a little logo on the splashscreen and everything.

    7. Re:Sort of a let down by VMSBIGOT · · Score: 2

      Stupid side note to this; The startup screen was a .rle file that was on the install disks. When you ran setup it copied this file, along with the code section and the string file into Win.com. You could do the same with a "copy /b win.bin+win.str+winlogo.rle win.com" from a DOS prompt.

    8. Re:Sort of a let down by dave562 · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? My 286 had a reset button on the front of the machine, long before Windows 3.x was out.

    9. Re:Sort of a let down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahhhh.. yes Windows 3.x. The reason the reset button was moved to the front of the machine.

      No seriously. It used to be a big red momentary switch on the back.

      Try again, anybody familiar with old computers can tell you that you're lying.

      Here, see some examples here:

      http://www.frontier-electronics.co.za/early_computers.htm

      Maybe people just realized that buttons in the back were a bad idea. Even my power buttons are in the front now, for obvious reasons.

      Now what happened to that old metal key they used to have, that I don't know. Seriously, I can't even recall their names.

    10. Re:Sort of a let down by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The PC AT was the first machine released which was eventually capable of running Windows and its reset switch is nonexistent, you have to BRS it and the BRS is on the side just like the PC and the PC XT.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:Sort of a let down by azalin · · Score: 3, Informative

      That trick could done through all 3.x versions. Create a .rle bitmap with the right size. Replace original file (prior or any time after installation) and you had your own custom startup logo.

    12. Re:Sort of a let down by EdIII · · Score: 1

      I wasn't lying, just being facetious.

      GP mentioned how often they crashed back then, and it did bring up memories of early Windows machines.

      I don't remember exactly when the buttons migrated from the back to the front. The red push button at the back though is a very clear memory for me. On that particular computer it could crash quite often if you hit multiple keys on the keyboard at the same time.

      Now, I had almost forget about the keys. Normally they are only on rackmount servers these days to lock up the front. Back then though I remember the keys actually interrupting the power supply.

    13. Re:Sort of a let down by burne · · Score: 1

      No, the lock disabled the keyboard by switching off power to the keyboard.

    14. Re:Sort of a let down by cffrost · · Score: 2

      I don't remember exactly when the buttons migrated from the back to the front. The red push button at the back though is a very clear memory for me.

      The IBM PS/2 series desktops contained a steel rod which mechanically linked the front power switch to the switch on the PSU, which was still located at the rear of the chassis.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    15. Re:Sort of a let down by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Early *True* IBM PC-ATs had a really big toggle switch on the side. This is because the very first PC-ATs used an identical form factor to the PC-XT class system chasis, and was pretty much the same, other than the inclusion of an RTC, and a 286. (and able to see significantly more RAM.)

      Here's an image to prove it.

      The original AT did not have any buttons that I am aware of on the chasis, other than technically the keylock switch... Later iterations, if I recall correctly... (it has been quite some time since my hands have been in one of THOSE things...) had a yellow turbo button, and a red reset button, but that was much later.

      Here is a back of the original PC-AT (IBM 5170) to prove the lack of buttons.

    16. Re:Sort of a let down by Canazza · · Score: 2

      Worked in 98 too. Not sure if it worked on ME, but I'm fairly sure it worked on the older NT systems.

      --
      It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
    17. Re:Sort of a let down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Kaypro II had a reset button on the back right, just below the top cable cleat. The power switch was a nice little rocker below that. No CHUNK! of a BRS needed or wanted.

      Maybe IBM machines just sucked, eh?

    18. Re:Sort of a let down by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Slightly different technique on win98. IIRC, the screen was actually a .bmp file with the wrong extension, logo.sys. You could also configure it not to boot the GUI at all, and just get the underlying DOS (Windows 9x was indeed, as critics so often claimed, built upon the foundation of DOS-with-a-few-extensions). I did that on one of my laptops to greatly reduce the boot time. You could always just enter the 'win' command to go graphical.

    19. Re:Sort of a let down by azalin · · Score: 1

      Definitively still worked with 2000, though I think there was a minor change. After that I lost interest so I can't tell you anything google couldn't better.

    20. Re:Sort of a let down by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Maybe IBM machines just sucked, eh?

      Or maybe they just sucked less, and you reboot them less, eh?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    21. Re:Sort of a let down by Creepy · · Score: 2

      Definitely before Windows 3.1, I remember power and reset buttons just above giant TURBO buttons on some 386s, though my 386 didn't have either.

    22. Re:Sort of a let down by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      You could run Windows 1, 2, and 3.0 on an 8088 based PC like the PC/XT. IIRC 3.1 was the first version of Windows that didn't support the 8088.

      Remember the whole "Are you running Windows in Real, Standard, or Extended mode?" thing?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    23. Re:Sort of a let down by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It was the same for the "it's now safe to shut off your computer" screen. I changed mine to read "It's not safe to shut off your computer" on my work PC. I wonder how many people copied that "now ok" file, renamed it BMP and put it as wallpaper on a co-worker's box?

  4. Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    They (AT&T, Xerox, IBM, and multinational companies of similar stature at the time) thought that the global information infrastructure would be centralized, monolithic and closed. Businesses and consumers would have to choose a provider that would provide the whole enchilada.

    This was the backdrop for Japan's Fifth Generation project (referenced by the AT&T video around 13:30) and was met with a certain amount of panic in the US at the time.

  5. The strange world of futurist by IgnitusBoyone · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've always found it interesting, how projections get the basic concepts right, but they completely miss on the piratical implementation of things. In TNG everyone caries around a small computing pad, but they seem to keep several of them from different reports and do not have any internal communication systems unless they download from a master main frame

    Early on one of the interviews talks about full volumetric holographic displays by the end of the centuries, but ignores the middle ground of real time video transmission on existing displays. And the artistic renderings through out the video's keep displays as simple monochrome 13inch displays, because no one seems to imagine a high resolution color display, but they can predict the need for a network based communication network to transmit idea's.

    The basics of the video are valid and a good projection to modern times, but all of the interpretations of how it will be implemented show a limitation based on 1985's existing tech. You see this same limitation in the early 1950/1960's articles on the world of tomorrow.

    --
    Momento Mori
    1. Re:The strange world of futurist by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I watched the original Alien again movie the other day and the "mother" room is full with nothing but a million little light bulbs and a tiny monochrome text only display. Not bad for 1979 though.

    2. Re:The strange world of futurist by fermion · · Score: 1
      There was a big miss with basic computers as well. It was assumed in many of the classic sci fi books that hard stuff, like calculations, would be done by hand while easy stuff like cleaning the house would be done by robots.

      The distressing thing is that this misconception still pervades the teaching of automation. Hardly ever do I see stationary machines doing useful work. Mostly what I see are moving machines engaged in meaningless activity that has no application in the real world, unless you are talkng about roomba, which very few people own.

      So yes, Star Trek was off with the PADD, but at least they had computers and robots mostly doing what computers and robots do. We can't even get that far in what we do.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    3. Re:The strange world of futurist by FrankSchwab · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hardly ever do I see stationary machines doing useful work. Mostly what I see are moving machines engaged in meaningless activity that has no application in the real world

      Ever seen an NC mill, lathe, waterjet, etc?

      --
      And the worms ate into his brain.
    4. Re:The strange world of futurist by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      hey completely miss on the piratical implementation of things

      Not sure if that typo was intentional or not, but you did hit on a big issue. The world of the future they envisioned was also one where they still controlled all content distribution.....They never really thought about the implications of people being able to store and transmit massive video libraries on their own....

    5. Re:The strange world of futurist by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Interesting

      then again, thank about designing a computer with display that would need to function for decades while everyone was in suspended animation, be rad & temp hardened, be absolutely robust and not fast or fancy. I can't imagine anything BUT a command line system with only sufficient res to make characters

    6. Re:The strange world of futurist by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Really though, in this movie the things they got right were the things that were already implemented. This was 1985, after all, a lot of people were already passing images over the net. When they started predicting, they went wrong.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:The strange world of futurist by nickersonm · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's an excellent point - there seems to be a certain timeframe beyond which futurists fail to consider the implications of progressive implementation. On only slightly shorter timeframes, they can actually do quite well - for example, AT&T had a series of "You Will" ads in 1993 that were strangely accurate in predicting modern technology. Presumably it has something to do with extending an existing technology in a logical way rather than trying to determine the intermediate uses of new concepts.

    8. Re:The strange world of futurist by harley78 · · Score: 1

      I thought you meant the "miss" part.....Kitchen etc? Is that the woman's new role?

    9. Re:The strange world of futurist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really though, in this movie the things they got right were the things that were already implemented. This was 1985, after all, a lot of people were already passing porn over the net. When they started predicting, they went wrong.

      There. FTFY

    10. Re:The strange world of futurist by tsa · · Score: 1

      That is one of the things that made '2002' such a great movie: flat screens, Skype-like communication with pictures and more stuff that was quite inconceivable in those days.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    11. Re:The strange world of futurist by azalin · · Score: 2

      Are you only referring to household toys, or are we talking robots/machines in general? While I do admit that household robotics is mostly expensive toys (like the roomba) the amount of highly sophisticated and very useful robotics elsewhere is enormous.

    12. Re:The strange world of futurist by ShoulderOfOrion · · Score: 1

      I was reminded of this implementation blindness the other day watching an old Outer Limits episode (can't remember the exact one) from the early 1960's. Because the show was set in the future about 50 years (ie, now), the episode showed advanced technology. For example, video phones about the size of a PC, with the monitor showing the person on the other end of the line (in B&W, of course). The 'keyboard' area was where the dialing device was. You know, put your finger in the hole, turn the dial, let it go, put your finger in another hole, turn, ...

    13. Re:The strange world of futurist by bejiitas_wrath · · Score: 1

      "The Tunnel" A 1935 scifi film had videoconferencing in 1935. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tunnel_(1935_film). This is quite prescient for the time, they could never have imagined that we would carry powerful computers in our pockets now though.

      --
      liberare massarum ex ignorantia, clausa descendit molestie.
    14. Re:The strange world of futurist by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Depends how you define 'robot.' There are lots of stationary appliances that are intended to do things mechanically so that humans do not need to. Washing machines, dishwashers, blenders. They aren't quite robots as they don't make use of any feedback or sensory input beyond the most basic controls and safety locks, but they are machines in the home.

    15. Re:The strange world of futurist by epine · · Score: 2

      It was assumed in many of the classic sci fi books that hard stuff, like calculations, would be done by hand while easy stuff like cleaning the house would be done by robots.

      In nearly 100% of these cases, the author was more invested in his success as a writer than his success as a futurist. You found this stuff sitting right beside accounts that were nowhere near this stupid. It's pretty hard to write a convincing story (that men will buy) where doing your own vacuuming helps you get laid.

      I read a fair amount of Arthur C. Clarke and never once tripped over a Roomba.

      I was there, and from where I sat, there was no confusion whatsoever between science based speculation and Gadget Boy, bachelor at large.

      My university had one of these early terminals on display in the main lobby of the math building. It updated the colour screen (extremely vivid, but not terribly detailed) at about the same speed as four elite Counterstrike players enrolled in a team Etch-a-Sketch competition. You could learn about the world faster flipping through the advertising supplement in the Yellow Pages. The machine was used for about 2 minutes an hour.

      It was with the introduction of the CDROM when I realized that the future of the information economy would never be the same again. The main hold-up seemed to be the lack of a decent display (megapixel with at least 8-bit colour). I severely underestimated how incremental distribution (the internet) was essential to content creation. The present-day en.Wikipedia could be condensed to 500MB and retain 90% of its utility (as a static reference). CDROMs would have sufficed as a distribution method. Was Encarta a reference work, or just a parental-wallet compatible way to promote multimedia, and yet more rounds of expensive hardware upgrades? I never looked at it, suspecting it was more of the later.

      It was plainly obvious how these technologies amplified information. It wasn't nearly so obvious how these technologies amplified collaboration. Ask any programmer who had just cashed a fat Y2K consulting cheque if they saw Wikipedia coming.

      Jetsons: Having stuff. Dominant corporation: Leviton.

      These days, some people worry if children can tell the difference between video violence and the real world. I assure you, in my childhood, I could already tell the difference between cartoons about the future and the future as it was likely to unfold.

    16. Re:The strange world of futurist by toygeek · · Score: 2

      You mean like the DCPU-16? Lets just hope everyone uses the same endians this time... http://0x10c.com/

    17. Re:The strange world of futurist by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Ask any programmer who had just cashed a fat Y2K consulting cheque if they saw Wikipedia coming.

      Well .... something a bit like it:

      What's wrong Ford?
      Arthur, some complete and utter bastard has edited my article down to "mostly harmless".

    18. Re:The strange world of futurist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I found out a few months ago that washing machines are actually more clever than that. For a while towards the end of the cycle, the machine will spin around at a slow speed, backwards and forwards - it's trying to balance the load around the drum so it doesn't shake itself to bits when doing the main spin. It will detect how well the load is balanced and either move onto the regular spin, spin at a reduced speed, or not at all. There are some other things it will detect as well, if I recall.

    19. Re:The strange world of futurist by operagost · · Score: 1

      You've never seen a dishwasher, clothes washer, or dryer? You've never seen a factory robot? These are all microprocessor controller.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    20. Re:The strange world of futurist by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      The world of the future they envisioned was also one where they still controlled all content distribution.....They never really thought about the implications of people being able to store and transmit massive video libraries on their own

      A good example of what you're talking about is Murray Leinster's 1946 short story A Logic Named Joe (the story is at the supplied link).

    21. Re:The strange world of futurist by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      It only needs to survive as much radiation as a human. No-one needs to read it if they're all dead.

    22. Re:The strange world of futurist by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      presumably the humans in the suspended animation pods get additional shielding for their decades-long nap, just in case cumulative dose becomes a problem or something flares up

  6. 1985 was a good year by EdIII · · Score: 4, Funny

    Not mentioned was the first test run of the flux capacitor.

    Unfortunately, it was strapped to a DeLorean so it did not have a lot of credibility at the time.

    1. Re:1985 was a good year by cffrost · · Score: 1

      Not mentioned was the first test run of the flux capacitor.

      Unfortunately, it was strapped to a DeLorean so it did not have a lot of credibility at the time.

      If you're gonna build a time machine into a car, why not do it with some style? Besides, the stainless steel construction makes the flux dispersa
      NO CARRIER

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  7. Where's China? by Amiga+Trombone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One thing stood out for me was that of all the nations discussed as possible competitors to the US, China wasn't even mentioned once. This was made less than 30 years ago. Just goes to show you how quickly the unexpected can happen.

    1. Re:Where's China? by LinuxInDallas · · Score: 2

      The 80s were Japan's rise. I don't recall hearing about China until the 90s.

    2. Re:Where's China? by Mashiki · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And the 90's was Japan's fall. Oddly enough if the 2000's were China's rise, this decade will probably be China's fall.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:Where's China? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Parts where made in the UK, US for the mil, people leaving the mil, gov where selling their unique skills....
      South Korea, Japan, other parts of SE Asia where all setting up to supply the world as good, safe, cheaper, trusted non communist production zones as needed.
      The US got smarter and went one cheaper - China - lol all the way to the bank.
      The deal was done under Nixon, it just took a while for the average person to understand role of communist production zones while not liking communist Russia.....
      Japan was the only threat with RAM and the skills to write a useful OS.
      US free trade deals killed that.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:Where's China? by antifoidulus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Thats already starting to happen, growth is slowing in China, who copied Japans economy right down to the bad debts. And just as in Japan, as long as the economy was growing fast the debts really didnt matter, but that era is coming to a close. China bulls are in for a rude awakening when they find out that China is, in fact, not made of magical economy elves that prevent the economy from ever shrinking.

    5. Re:Where's China? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      Amazing what ditching Marxism and adopting a market-based economy will do.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    6. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please look up "were" and "where" and then use the words correctly. Otherwise people will just ignore you as a semi-literate ignorant person.

    7. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Japan never fell. By most accounts of social welfare, they're doing just as good as at their peak. What Japan did was sacrifice corporate growth for social stability. That means it's a crappy place to invest, and it doesn't make nearly as many millionaires as the US, yet they have better healthcare, wage stability, etc. They've been able to eke out just enough productivity, year-by-year, to maintain their extremely high per capita wealth.

      I'm not saying Japan is better than the US in any particular respect. But the idea that they fell is patently ridiculous and easily falsifiable by using any metric other than ones most remote from measuring human welfare.

    8. Re:Where's China? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      They've ditched Marxism? What they have is a bastard child of Feudalism and Maoism, where private companies are allowed to do whatever they want, so long as the People's Government is allowed to horn in on whatever % of the action they feel like.

    9. Re:Where's China? by rs79 · · Score: 0

      His facts are dead on and insightful. I can parse the semantics thanks, and don't give a shit about the syntax.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    10. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mr. Jones related an incident from "some time back" when IBM Canada Ltd. of Markham, Ont., ordered some parts from a new supplier in Japan. The company noted in its order that acceptable quality allowed for 1.5 per cent defects (a fairly high standard in North America at the time). The Japanese sent the order, with a few parts packaged separately in plastic. The accompanying letter said: "We don't know why you want 1.5 per cent defective parts, but for your convenience, we've packed them separately." -- Excerpted from an article in The (Toronto) Globe and Mail

    11. Re:Where's China? by azalin · · Score: 2

      I think you should really look up what Marx really wrote. Hint: It doesn't have that much in common with any of the real live communist regimes. Also what China labels itself and what China really does are not necessarily the same.

    12. Re:Where's China? by cffrost · · Score: 1

      Your interesting and amusing anecdote helped me remember William Demming, the statistician/consultant who helped to bring about Japan's reputation for quality in manufacturing.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    13. Re:Where's China? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Marx's ideology was sound, but he failed to address the issues of corruptability. Any attempt to realize his ideas creates a perfect breeding ground for corruption, power-grabbing and oppression, and any ideals of economic equality for all are rapidly abandoned at the leadership consolidates their power. I do think that his ideas were fundamentally sound, merely incomplete.

    14. Re:Where's China? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      No, but "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is a Marx quote which ignores the basic human desire to get as much as possible for as little as possible. Any surplus can be bartered on the black market, so you will want more of everything. This means that somebody is going to be the arbitrator of that and say that no, you don't need more gasoline and that yes, you can deliver more wheat from your farm. And those arbitrators will very quickly become their own class that decide what everyone else needs and shall provide while they scratch each other's back in an orgy of corruption.

      Communism isn't just somebody who took Marx' ideas and used them as an ideological cover to take over the government, it is the practical result of trying to implement marxism with real people. Which of course brings out all the idealists that claim it's not the ideology there's something wrong with, it's the people. But I'll take a system that - at least more or less - works in the real world with real people over an idealized system that only works with ideal people. And no, no matter what China calls themselves they're absolutely not marxist or communist today.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    15. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This one is really old - that China, and previously, countries like the Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea and others weren't practicing real Communism. Problem is that Marx never attempted to subject any of his theories to a reality check, but when the rubber did meet the road - be it in Leningrad, Beijing, Havana, or Pyongyang, the laws of unintended consequences took over.

    16. Re:Where's China? by wrook · · Score: 1

      This joke has come around in a number of forms. I've heard it about IBM parts, GM car parts, and a few others. So far I have no definitive answer as to whether or not it has a true beginning. I'd love to hear from someone who knows. I suspect it's untrue, but the idea of sending defective parts separately packaged because they were requested is so true to Japanese culture that I really hope it is true.

    17. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, with Marx concentrating all, or as much power as he could, to government, the issue of corruptability was only exacerbated. The only way his ideas can be realized is by government seizing all power and engaging in a massive social engineering project. However, once government HAS all that power, that is where the money flows as a result. Problem with Marx's ideology was that he never factored in the laws of unintended consequences.

    18. Re:Where's China? by roman_mir · · Score: 2

      This decade will be the decade of the fall of the US dollar, fall of the Euro, fall of the concept of 'social contract' and ever greater rise of the economies that actually produce stuff and those who export energy, raw materials and agriculture products.

      China is already the dominant economy in the world today and it will only strengthen that position. Given what the choices are in USA and Europe for the leaders and given the fact what the understanding of economics and history is among the general population, USA and Europe will only be sliding further into poverty.

    19. Re:Where's China? by azalin · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. Whatever Marx thought of as an ideal society failed at the very basic understanding of human nature. It is kind of sad, but down at the core we are most interested in our self or in those close to us. We are also very lazy if we can get away with it.
      Communism might actually work for a small village but it does scale terribly. Once you are over a certain number of people, you need to force people to do what the government thinks is best. Other than altruism there aren't many other incentives to do your best for a common goal, even though it might be to your personal disadvantage.
      This was always the advantage of the free economies, they only depended only on personal greed and people acting in their own best interest. All the governments had to do, was to provide some rules for the game and limit excesses. In some cases (Germany, Sweden, Canada etc.) they choose to redistribute some of the societies wealth, to help those in need and pay for things like free education, healthcare and pensions. There is a limit how many freeloaders such a system can sustain, but as long as generate enough wealth, it works rather nicely.
      Humans are not simple greedy beasts, but still far from perfect or ideal. Any society relying on altruism and good nature is bound to fail - sometimes horribly.

    20. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wishful thinking. China and Japan are vastly different in size, population, and history. Japan is occupied buy the us, and China is docking in space. Vast differences, but bigots everywhere are all waiting for a silly parallel between the two.

    21. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fall of the concept of 'social contract'

      Nah, social contracts will rise. As China becomes more prosperous, its people will demand more, and they aren't going to wait for free market capitalism to deliver them.

      For example, many mainland Chinese women flock to Hong Kong to have their babies, as Hong Kong offers them (their babies) more welfare. They didn't wait for the mainland to develop those things through capitalism. Of course native Hong Kong people are pissed at this, so they complain to their government, and more regulations and bureaucracy will inevitably be created.

      rise of the economies that actually produce stuff and those who export energy, raw materials and agriculture products

      US still produces a lot. Like weapons. They still have a large agriculture sector since they have lots of arable land and the technology to produce efficiently. So if they really want to, they could just feed their soldiers to conquer and pillage everything else they need.

      China is already the dominant economy in the world today

      Doesn't matter. The world economy is all connected these days, thanks to all the centralization and governments colluding with each other. The shit happening in Europe and US affects China, and vice versa.

      People who think they've escaped by moving elsewhere only gained a temporary reprieve. If/when they become richer (the thing about being rich is that it's hard to hide it), socialism will hunt them down.

      Given what the choices are in USA and Europe for the leaders and given the fact what the understanding of economics and history is among the general population, USA and Europe will only be sliding further into poverty.

      Nah, given an understanding of economies and history, the USA and Europe will resort to violence to get what they want. US driving out the native Americans, Europe driving out natives in the days of colonialism, "the West" ganging up on China back in the days of the Opium Wars, etc.

      History has shown that might makes right, and the West has no problem using force to get what they want, and it doesn't matter to them if their actions somehow "slow down" or even destroy progress and freedom. What matters is they get what they want.

    22. Re:Where's China? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      That's not much later than the time a Chinese freind of mine who grew up in Beijing in a normal middle class family got to eat an entire chicken leg of his own for the first time. China was still trying to recover from Mao back then.

    23. Re:Where's China? by operagost · · Score: 1

      It's really another variety of fascism, which no one outside of bloggers and talk radio want to talk about because they would have to admit that fascism isn't "right wing".

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    24. Re:Where's China? by operagost · · Score: 1

      So what we need is a true Scotsman?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    25. Re:Where's China? by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      My high school geography teacher predicted the rise of China in 1986.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    26. Re:Where's China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parts where made in the UK, US for the mil, people leaving the mil, gov where selling their unique skills....

      South Korea, Japan, other parts of SE Asia where all setting up to supply the world as good, safe, cheaper, trusted non communist production zones as needed.

      The US got smarter and went one cheaper - China - lol all the way to the bank.

      The deal was done under Nixon, it just took a while for the average person to understand role of communist production zones while not liking communist Russia.....

      Japan was the only threat with RAM and the skills to write a useful OS.

      US free trade deals killed that.

      Speak English please.

    27. Re:Where's China? by Cito · · Score: 1

      I dont give a fuck about syntax, spelling and grammar. I only care for the message.

      and I dont spellcheck my own posts either, its about message not syntax/spelling/grammar

    28. Re:Where's China? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      We put it differently, but reach the same conclusion. Marx believed that the people comprising that government would all be idealists, who went into politics out of a desire to help their fellow men, and would strive to their full ability to better the lives of those they govern. A childish naiveity. Real politicians are selfish bastards who'll do whatever they can to increase their own wealth and power, and any real idealists either get crushed by those willing to pay dirty or have to give in and join the power games.

    29. Re:Where's China? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Or else some attempt to combine the socialist economic princibles with constitutional limitations on government non-economic power and independant oversight of all government activity by both the press and any interested members of the public. That route still holds some promise. There is even a viewpoint that such a thing may one day be the only way forward as continued advances in automation technology may cause the unintentional collapse of the labor market upon which free-market economies are built.

  8. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Agreed. I actually have slashdot pointed to localhost in my hosts file on all my computers except one laptop...that I'm on now. Part of the problem is I've yet to find a good replacement that is more like the slashdot of ye olden days.

  9. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by trdrstv · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They (AT&T, Xerox, IBM, and multinational companies of similar stature at the time) thought that the global information infrastructure would be centralized, monolithic and closed. Businesses and consumers would have to choose a provider that would provide the whole enchilada.

    Not surprising. They figured "the internet" would be run like cable TV... hell Cable TV providers are still trying to make that happen.

  10. Telecommute by LinuxInDallas · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The intro actually used the word telecommute when talking about how computers were in the home. Was that a word in common usage at the time? I was only 12 at the time banging out BASIC programs copied from magazines so I wouldn't recall lol.

    1. Re:Telecommute by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Considering we were already "commuting" to shared computers in 1985, yes, telecommute wasn't a foreign concept.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    2. Re:Telecommute by baegucb · · Score: 1

      Here's how I sometimes worked from home back then: http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/accession/102674749

    3. Re:Telecommute by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      Was that a word in common usage at the time?

      Fairly. It was first coined, as far as is known in 1974.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    4. Re:Telecommute by MisterSquid · · Score: 1

      I was only 12 at the time banging out BASIC programs copied from magazines so I wouldn't recall lol.

      I totally remember doing this!

      I imagined on a subconscious level that programming computers was something like data entry. Looking back, clearly I was equating the creation of words (I'm a writer by calling; web developer by historical accident) using a keyboard to being "productive" with computers.

      Good times.

      --
      blog
    5. Re:Telecommute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IIRC, Family Computing magazine had a monthly column called "Telecommuting". Or was it "Telecomputing"? Whatever the name, that was the subject.

  11. AT & Whom? by in4mer · · Score: 1

    Wait, is this the same AT&T that didn't officially admit until somewhere in the 'aughts that packet switching was actually a viable technology?

    The same AT&T that couldn't possibly understand why telephones would replace the telegraph?

    The same AT&T that tells Congress that competition among telcos hurts consumers?

    Something doesn't seem quite right, here.

    --
    enefesdi bhootparamdi

    if a thing is worth doing at all, it's worth doing right. -- H.S. Thompson
    1. Re:AT & Whom? by sjames · · Score: 2

      It's simple, this was the distant future brought to you by AT&T Internet where all communications are approved by AT&T and their corporate buddies who pay big bux for the right to have a server. And not to worry, it'll all be done with short haul Frame Relay feeding into long haul SONET. All paid for in your monthly bill from AT&T. All safely in the hands of corporate America.

      And absolutely none of that crazy Communist Egalitarian peer2peer packet switching nonsense in sight!

    2. Re:AT & Whom? by FrankSchwab · · Score: 1

      The same AT&T that tells Congress that competition among telcos hurts consumers?

      Well, they were right from a technical point of view, but not from a cost point of view.

      Phone service now is far cheaper than when AT&T was in control of long-distance, and has far more unique providers (Multiple long-distance providers, Skype, Cell Phones, VOIP, etc). But, the quality of phone calls is vastly inferior to what AT&T was selling. Get on a landline, and talk to someone on a landline someday. No dropped calls, no half-second latency that causes one person to talk over the other, etc.

      --
      And the worms ate into his brain.
    3. Re:AT & Whom? by rs79 · · Score: 1

      Yes and they wern't sure how they'd use SONET, the only thing they were sure of was tcp/ip would almost certainly have no place. In 1991 the ITU go the USG to ban any network communications with and for the government in anything but OSI protocols.

      Despite the fact they never existed. "they sounded great on paper though!"

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    4. Re:AT & Whom? by rs79 · · Score: 1

      Skype is better than any landline.

      There's pretty good reasons for that.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    5. Re:AT & Whom? by tsa · · Score: 1

      Really? I knew your mobile phone system was fucked up but that Skype is better than landlines in the US is a surprise to me. I live in Europe and I know quite a lot of people who don't use Skype because 'the quality is not good enough.'

      --

      -- Cheers!

    6. Re:AT & Whom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's simple, this was the distant future brought to you by AT&T Internet where all communications are approved by AT&T and their corporate buddies who pay big bux for the right to have a server. And not to worry, it'll all be done with short haul Frame Relay feeding into long haul SONET. All paid for in your monthly bill from AT&T. All safely in the hands of corporate America.

      And absolutely none of that crazy Communist Egalitarian peer2peer packet switching nonsense in sight!

      And don't forget that biggest winner of all for Digital Telecom: ISDN (popularly known as "It Still Does Nothing").

    7. Re:AT & Whom? by azalin · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure about your statement. Sure a dedicated land line is fine, but it is not really that superior. Even landlines get bundled and concentrated at some point. The more lines you jam into a single upstream the more money you make until at some point the service degrades to much. Skype does needs (some) dedicated bandwidth, a thing tcp/ip was never intended for but it still performs rather well in most cases. I won't even start on cell phones, because thats a whole different ballgame.

    8. Re:AT & Whom? by sjames · · Score: 2

      It's truly amazing how much tech grew up around end-running the inability of the telecoms companies to do anything even slightly innovative or sensible. Because they couldn't pull their collective heads out of their asses and just implement ISDN in an affordable way, the modem developed from simple frequency shift keying to rather complex signal processing to trick the AtoD converters into encoding 56Kbps digital data onto a 64Kbps digital line passing through analog audio.

      To add insult to injury, the telcos are so incredibly bad at appropriate tech that it's cheaper to nail up digital connections over voice lines to form a digital network and THEN carry voice traffic over the digital layer than it is to use the voice lines directly for their intended purpose.

      The truly bizarre part is they had labs where actual innovative and clever things were done all the time but the business side had no ability to actually do anything useful with the tech.

    9. Re:AT & Whom? by Cito · · Score: 1

      I enjoy Teamspeak or Ventrillo for voice communication with family.

      course with the high codecs it uses the quality is loads better than skype or landline

      but I know it's a bit different, but does allow for private chats or conference style chats.

      plus when family aren't using it, it works great for friends when gaming

    10. Re:AT & Whom? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      The truly bizarre part is they had labs where actual innovative and clever things were done all the time but the business side had no ability to actually do anything useful with the tech.

      It's the cash cow mindset, when a buisness has one or two things that bring in the vast majority of their profit they will often avoid for as long as possible anything that could possiblly disprut that source of profit. Even if they could potentially get more profit from the new thing in the future.

      Frankly i'm surprised we got DSL at all.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    11. Re:AT & Whom? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      The key with traditional landline phones is that once you make a call you get a reserved slice of bandwidth for the duration of the call. That means a known and stable call quality. With VOIP the quality may be very good (sometimes better than traditional landline) but it can be disrupted by other traffic. QOS can mitigate this but it can't really be used on the open internet (so VOIP with QOS is only really useful to large buisnesses who are trying to combine their phone and data infrastructure).

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    12. Re:AT & Whom? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Like every other advance on that front, the Bells were dragged in kicking and screaming. At first it was 3rd parties ordering dry pairs such as would be used for higher end security alarms. Next, it was ILECS providing DSL with the Bells using every dirty trick in the book including "accidentally" disconnecting the ILECs equipment on a regular basis. If not for the breakup and special rules requiring them to rent lines and facilities to 3rd parties, it would never have happened.

      Once a 3rd party proved that a particular area could support DSL (killing their favorite excuse), they would start offering it themselves so they wouldn't become irrelevant. It's really just pure luck (for the consumer) that DSL came about before the AT&T re-assembled T-1000 like.

  12. Reminds me of Ontario Science Centre circa 1975 by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Ontario Science Centre in the mid-1970s was wicked cool. The glimpses into the future were all there for you to touch and play with. (The Philips Coffee Machine was one of my favorites). Sadly, science museums have devolved into environmentalism and global warming preaching which by comparison is about as much fun as watching the organic, free-range, fair-trade grass grow.

    1. Re:Reminds me of Ontario Science Centre circa 1975 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, science museums have devolved into environmentalism and global warming preaching...

      Science museums have always had an agenda for recruiting young minds to a cause.

      That's the whole purpose of science museums. The best thing to put in a science museum today, IMHO would be any scale of chip fab. Show everybody it's not just a magic black box that makes all their gadgets work. Explain the pieces of a computer to them; I understood it when I was that age.

      Environmentalism and GW has enough coverage, and it's sooo depressing. "Hey kids, this is science, and you're all doomed!".

    2. Re:Reminds me of Ontario Science Centre circa 1975 by rs79 · · Score: 1

      The science center opened in 1970. Lasers you could watch burn wood, computers you could use yourself and more cool things than you could do in a day. It was, and remains, utterly inspirational.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    3. Re:Reminds me of Ontario Science Centre circa 1975 by hawguy · · Score: 2

      The Ontario Science Centre in the mid-1970s was wicked cool. The glimpses into the future were all there for you to touch and play with. (The Philips Coffee Machine was one of my favorites). Sadly, science museums have devolved into environmentalism and global warming preaching which by comparison is about as much fun as watching the organic, free-range, fair-trade grass grow.

      Check out the Miraikan in Tokyo, or the Exploratorium in San Francisco to see a Science Museum that doesn't hit you over the head with environmentalism. Just say away from the California Acadmy of Sciences in San Francisco since just about every exhibit in that museum talks about how whatever that exhibit is about is dying because of climate change.

    4. Re:Reminds me of Ontario Science Centre circa 1975 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anti-science much?

    5. Re:Reminds me of Ontario Science Centre circa 1975 by Hatta · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sadly, science museums have devolved into environmentalism and global warming preaching which by comparison is about as much fun as watching the organic, free-range, fair-trade grass grow.

      Damn liberal scientists, always trying to save the world. Better to send your kids to a good conservative museum.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:Reminds me of Ontario Science Centre circa 1975 by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Anti-science much?

      What's anti-science about pointing out two very cool science museums that don't make you feel guilty for living?

  13. Globe model by n2505d · · Score: 1

    Spinning in the wrong direction...

    1. Re:Globe model by GumphMaster · · Score: 1

      This all feeds in to the "We never went to the Moon" conspiracies. Surely if we had been to the Moon everybody would know which way the Earth spins. ;)

      --
      Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
    2. Re:Globe model by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

      I noticed that too. I guess they didn't have the technology back then to spin it the right way. Cut them some slack...

    3. Re:Globe model by azalin · · Score: 1

      In fact their model is perfectly correct, because the video was shot before the rotation change of 1988.

    4. Re:Globe model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the Grand Equatorial Shift of 1997.

      (Contrary to popular belief, the equator does *not* run through New York)

    5. Re:Globe model by azalin · · Score: 1

      And the Grand Equatorial Shift of 1997.

      (Contrary to popular belief, the equator does *not* run through New York)

      I think at that point the obnoxious synthesizer music already shut down most of my cognitive functions.

  14. From another point of view... by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Can films be used as prior art to invalidate patents?

    1. Re:From another point of view... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2

      Can films be used as prior art to invalidate patents?

      So if somebody invented the matter replicator right now you wouldn't think they'd deserve a patent on it?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:From another point of view... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Because they dont showcase working inventions. They've faked it.

    3. Re:From another point of view... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They wouldn't deserve a look & feel design patent, no.

    4. Re:From another point of view... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone invented the matter replicator... A patent would be pointless.

      Because the first person to buy a replicator. Is going to tell it to start making replicators to sell.

      matter to energy conversion systems would completely disrupt all patent, trademark, and business in the entire world. forever.
      Which is why we won't ever have such technology available to the consumer. Unless it was locked down in a billion and one ways. We won't ever get such a technology.

    5. Re:From another point of view... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Why? Are you thinking that a technology like this would instantly fit within whatever an Art Director would design as a casing intended to be readable to a television audience?

      I really do wonder if anyb

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    6. Re:From another point of view... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2

      I apologize, accidentally clicked submit instead of preview. Here's the whole message:

      Why? Are you thinking that a technology like this would instantly fit within whatever an Art Director would design as a casing intended to be readable to a television audience?

      I really do wonder if anybody who thinks what they see on TV can invalidate a patent has ever seen what goes into making a show. Here's a hint: Nobody on 2001 held a prop that displayed anything like a an LCD screen does.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    7. Re:From another point of view... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up. Very little technology is blue-screen-comp-based. The biggest budget in the world could not have created a reasonable competitor to the iPad near the release of 2001. Frankly, nobody in 2010 could, either. Funny how popular opinion on this site is that Apple doesn't create anything new, yet the competition........

    8. Re:From another point of view... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      But can show the obviousness of an idea. It can show the patent has no novel idea. Would it actually carry the day in a court? I am not sure.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    9. Re:From another point of view... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      How can it show the obviousness of an idea if the technology cannot even fit within the prop's casing without lots of work needed to attain that goal?

      If I write a short story that involves a cell phone so small that it can be embedded in one's fingernail, please explain how that detracts from the people who come up with processors, batteries, antennae, and casings that can make something so small a reality.

      Seriously, 2001 predates put current notion of an LCD by so many years that this whole discussion has been labeled a form of birth control.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    10. Re:From another point of view... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't samsung use 2001 to try to refute an Apple design patent claim?

    11. Re:From another point of view... by sorak · · Score: 1

      I think AC's point is that you can patent the technology that makes the device work, but you can't patent the user interface. If the "owners" of Star Trek decide to patent the "look and feel" of the LCARS user interface, then that's their right. They just can't patent the Warp drive.

    12. Re:From another point of view... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      I think AC's point is that you can patent the technology that makes the device work, but you can't patent the user interface.

      Right, it still doesn't make sense. Somebody designing a prop for a movie isn't actually designing a product. It only serves as an inspiration.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    13. Re:From another point of view... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Can films be used as prior art to invalidate patents?

      Nope. To get a patent you have to have a working prototype. A TV or movie prop is not a working prototype, it's just an imitation.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    14. Re:From another point of view... by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      A film prop is a working prototype for a design patent.

  15. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I think of ATT and its company-produced advertising (of which there are tens of hours: there's a short for that), think forward-looking, but not exactly what the material predicted. How long afterwards were we consumers able to get 45Mbps?

    While we are at it, peeking through the channel, almost the same ATT a quarter-century back had a combined live-action+animation short which predicted that 86ing those old telephone EXchange NAmes (telephone exchanges carrying 10000 lines were large and expensive, plus, ATT thought remembering seven numbers was difficult; ergo, according to Ma Bell, they felt they had to be named: e.g. REpublic 7, NAtional 8, DI. 7, EX. 3, [...]) meant that our keypads would lack letters beside the numbers (Commercials screaming phonewords every other minute? Texting-on-the-flip-phone-from-2002 addictions? Mr Digit could've cured 'em all!) and would even yield Outer Space Dialling!1!

    (At the same time, I'm so astounded at Bell Labs, which while they were a zealot for IP actually employed talented people. Remember, if you are using C/C++...)

    Captcha: stupidly: as in my tendency to look like I almost strayed off the topic.

    1. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/people./people, they actually contributed a lot to technology./g

      s/back/from the 1985 video mentioned above/g

      The captcha I had to type before is looking more poetic each minute.

      New captcha: conquers. Like ATT did and still wants and continues to do to the home and cell phone business through "interesting" means, even after the breakup.

  16. Al Gore was right on top of that! by mbadolato · · Score: 1

    Al Gore didn't go into the Senate until 1985. so inventing the Information Super Highway (née, Internet) must have been the very first thing he did when he got in office!

    1. Re:Al Gore was right on top of that! by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 2

      He was a congressman for 9 years prior to being elected to the Senate. He was boring the pants off everyone about the Internet since the 70s! The actual quote containing his infamous claim was:

      During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.

    2. Re:Al Gore was right on top of that! by azalin · · Score: 1

      How very nice of him to do. Did he use the good old trusty method of "there shall be light" to start the first fiber optics?

    3. Re:Al Gore was right on top of that! by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 2

      No, it was more like "let there be money".

      It is just like how Steve Jobs didn't work in a Foxconn sweatshop building iPhones, and yet he still got the kudos for the product.

  17. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

    I was doing a lot of this in 1985, including running on what would become the internet. If I'd had the money, a satellite phone (the only kind running at the time IIRC) would have merely put me back about 3K.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  18. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    We really didn't even get this until about 1995!

    Sure we did. I was here in the early 80's, and know people who were here in the late 70's.

    The AOL crowd showed up in the mid 90's and essentially destroyed the original internet culture. This was not an improvement.

  19. Re:IBM is the Information Age. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 1990 IBM was baking RAS technologies into its POWER processors, INTEL would not start building reliable processor unitil late 2010.

  20. 1985 was my 3rd year on the internet: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    1983, at my university, was my first exposure. I'd say the original internet lasted from its inception until about 1992 or 3, where the Eternal September utterly destroyed the original internet culture.

    True, the resources available online now are drastically beyond anything at the time - I mean, graphics, over the internet! - but despite that, the loss of the original culture is not a good thing. Now that everyone and his dog is aware of it, we have politicians trying to censor and control it, hundreds of millions of idiots supporting centralization of everything onto a few services like Facebook, the Closing of the Net where people move away from open and free protocols to proprietary and undocumented ones (a thing the original culture would never have stood for), and more.

    Yes, there's far more here now. No, it is NOT a better internet now.

    1. Re:1985 was my 3rd year on the internet: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I miss the Anonymous FTP Lists. Although today they'd probably ban them for copyright violations.

  21. Did anybody notice... by Circlotron · · Score: 1

    ...in the introduction that the earth was rotating backwards?

    1. Re:Did anybody notice... by youngone · · Score: 1

      No, I didn't, but I did notice the huuuuge gap between Alaska and The USSR.

  22. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 2, Insightful

    3K which was almost enough to pay for 4 years of university at the time.

  23. major oversight by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    Not one mention of lolcats? Wow, they were way off, as lolcats have taken over the entire internet.

  24. Cold war by goldgin · · Score: 1

    He talks as if every other country resides on a different enemy planet. If people talked like that now they would be considered terrorists...

  25. That globe graphic did my head in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That map projection that morphed into a globe was horrible - since when is the center of USA also on the equator?

  26. Where's Japan? by unixisc · · Score: 2

    The key question is whether Japan has as flaky a job base as the US? Yeah, it's tough for new entrants to get jobs, but once in, they don't fear losing it, except for performance related reasons. That, more than anything else, keeps their society stable.

    1. Re:Where's Japan? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Yes, because they have really tough rules on migrant workers, and really hard ass rules on immigration in particular. If I could pack up today, and move there I would. The real problem though is the job climb, Japan though is suffering from the same issue that Europe is. Too many people entrenched, and everyone entering are stuck in temp jobs.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:Where's Japan? by rachit · · Score: 1

      Japan already has severe problems with its demographics and its only going to get worse. They could use the immigration.

      China will also get there not too long from now. Their one-child policy simply was too draconian. Stable - slow population growth is good, shrinking population bad, rapidly growing population with not enough resources -- very bad.

    3. Re:Where's Japan? by wrook · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, Japan's immigration rules are extremely relaxed. For "engineers" (programmers qualify), if you have a degree and a job offer, you're good to go. The new rules even allow a 5 year visa which doesn't necessarily terminate if your job does. If you are a native English speaker (you have to have 12 years of education in the English Language), have a university degree and a job offer, you can teach English. Other categories exist for business owners, etc.

      I haven't looked at every country, but I think Japan is probably the easiest country to come and work in the G8. Why are there so few foreigners? Culturally it's hard if you are inflexible and you don't speak Japanese. Even though there are actually quite a few jobs available for English only speakers, Japanese culture is really linked to the language. I don't know how to explain it properly except that there is "inside" and there is "outside". If you only speak English (or Japanese poorly), you will always be "outside". Outside is sometimes kind of nice because nobody has any expectations of you. But similarly, you get few benefits. You're always the hanger on, never part of the in group.

      Even without language issues, many people have difficulty because Japan is an intensely moral culture. There are things that are absolutely morally right and absolutely morally wrong. The problem is that these things are often quite different than what is morally right and wrong in the west (especially the US, which is also a very moral culture). People from some certain cultures seem to have a great deal of difficulty dealing with Japanese ways of doing things. Not necessarily a bad thing, but not great if you want to live in Japan :-)

      Anyway, if you want to work in Japan, and have a university degree, you can do it. One last issue... The Japanese work system is really different. You get hired after university and you stay at your job forever. It's really hard to get a regular job if you aren't coming right out of school. It's nothing to do with immigration policies -- workers whose companies fold on them suffer too. This is why you get stuck in a "temp" job. It used to be that "temp" workers often got stuck with 1 year visas, which were renewed every march. If a company wanted to get rid of foreign workers, all they had to do was make it known that they didn't want to have the visas renewed and problem solved. But with the new system (starting next week, I think), they can no longer do that. Visas are 5 years and usually extend past the end of the job.

      The major downside for having a "temp" job is that usually you don't get paid a quarterly bonus or certain benefits. If you are a programmer, you can often negotiate these details. If you are a teacher, you can't and you will end up getting paid about half of what regular teachers get paid. However, the responsibilities are *much* less, so personally, I can't complain about it.

      Anyway, I live in Japan. I'm actually off abroad for a couple of years so that my wife can learn to speak English, but apart from that I'm here permanently. It's my home now. People here are friendly and welcoming of foreigners if you try hard to fit in.

    4. Re:Where's Japan? by unixisc · · Score: 2

      Shrinking population is bad in a country like Russia, where you have a huge area, but a shortage of a work force. Russia could really do w/ not just a slow, but even a rapid population growth - spread evenly from Moscow to the Bering Straight. A population of 1 billion could be comfortably fitted in that area.

      China, otoh, does have an young enough population (unlike Japan), although I read that they've relaxed the one child policy in a lot of places. But even if China had the Russian problem of a shrinkage in population, they can take it, since they're so over-populated. Same goes for India. As for Japan, it's not immigration that they need - as their older population dies out, the younger one will inevitably take its place. Only thing they need to be careful of is to retain the manufacturing that they have, and only have excess manufacturing in China.

    5. Re:Where's Japan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other problem in not enough women.

      You get millions of young males with no chances of getting a female and you may have problems.

    6. Re:Where's Japan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The gender imbalance isn't helping, either. Imagine millions of men with absolutely zero possibility of finding a Chinese wife, and channeling that rage at the government.

    7. Re:Where's Japan? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      they've relaxed the one child policy in a lot of places

      It never happened in some low population areas (eg. the ethnic Korean province that borders Russia and North Korea).

    8. Re:Where's Japan? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      yEngineers yes(and programming included). But I've had enough of the "engineering gig" aka programming. And am looking at something at some place to retire too and am looking specifically at my father's homeland. If I want to fall back on my mechanics ticket which I also have for an easy job once I quit my current gig, pain in the ass. But they're hurting for mechanics. Hell they're hurting for anyone who can even pick up a wrench, just like us here in Canada and the US.

      I do like the culture, my father's brother always looked at it as worker-bee centric. If you can handle it, you'll fit right in. If not, you'll burn out in about 5 weeks and probably commit suicide.

      Don't worry you're preaching to the choir, and I'm replying to one. It's just a pain in the ass, though I will say there are some people that have a really huge stick up their ass over hafu's. Then again, half the hafu in me doesn't mine. The other hafu goes bug-eyed over it. It's a lovely discussion they have. :D It's not as bad as brazillian-japanese go through though.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    9. Re:Where's Japan? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because they have really tough rules on migrant workers, and really hard ass rules on immigration in particular.

      Rubbish. I hold a Japanese resident visa, and live and work there. Getting the visa was straightforward, easy and efficient.

      On the other hand, when I had to get a visa for the US some years back, the process was unnecessarily difficult and convoluted, and the staff at the US embassy made it as unpleasant as possible. My experience has taught me that the US is far more anti-immigration than Japan.

  27. And in 1985 by Spy+Handler · · Score: 2

    quality of life was better. Kids actually went outside and played on a regular basis. Physically playing, not 3DS or iPad games... or facebooking each other on the "information superhighway".

    They rode bicycles without a helmet -- nanny state hadn't passed mandatory helmet laws for bicycles back then -- and didn't die! And no, 60% of kids weren't obese and didn't have diabetes back then.

    1. Re:And in 1985 by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      Was quality of life better?

      I'd love to be a kid nowadays!

    2. Re:And in 1985 by hawguy · · Score: 2

      quality of life was better. Kids actually went outside and played on a regular basis. Physically playing, not 3DS or iPad games... or facebooking each other on the "information superhighway".

      They rode bicycles without a helmet -- nanny state hadn't passed mandatory helmet laws for bicycles back then -- and didn't die! And no, 60% of kids weren't obese and didn't have diabetes back then.

      Actually, one of my friends in the early 80's fell off his bike and hit his head, and while he didn't die, he ended up spending a few days in the hospital (he was trying to show us how long he could ride a wheelie). He hit his head hard and lost consciousness.... there was a bloody spot under his head. Fortunately this was when neighbors actually knew each other, so the rest of us ran to the nearest neighbor's house (leaving him laying alone on the road!) and she called for help (but not 911 since that predated 911 in our town, most people in town had a bright orange sticker with the EMS number on their phone - something like "257-0257"). And many people still had to literally "dial" the phone.

      He suffered a serious concussion but escaped more serious injury. Had he been wearing a helmet it's likely that he would have just gotten back on his bike.

      I think bike helmet laws for children are a good thing and as an adult, I always wear my helmet on my bicycle and my motorcycle.

    3. Re:And in 1985 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the "and get off my lawn!", gramps.

    4. Re:And in 1985 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I know someone who rolled out of bed and hit their head, so I think that helmets should be compulsory in bed too.

    5. Re:And in 1985 by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Well I know someone who rolled out of bed and hit their head, so I think that helmets should be compulsory in bed too.

      How long did he spend in the hospital?

      There's a big difference between an 18 inch drop to the bedroom floor and a 5 foot drop to pavement.

    6. Re:And in 1985 by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Had he been wearing a helmet it's likely that he would have just gotten back on his bike.

      ....and pressed on doing whatever stupid thing caused him to almost kill himself the first time, feeling invincible. Without the helmet, it hurt, but I bet he was a lot more careful in the future wasn't he?

    7. Re:And in 1985 by azalin · · Score: 1

      I do remember 1985 pretty well and while it is true that some things where "more free" back then, I also do remember a whole bunch of things I'm very happy to have removed from modern living. CFCs, lead paint, asbestos, leaded fuel, no seatbelts, a whole range of cancerous additives in plastic toys, DDT and it's merry friends and many more.
      Nanny it may be, but just look up the car accidents to fatality ratio back then and today.
      And let us not forget the clothing, that was an eyesore.

      PS: Yes I do know DDT was already off limits in many western countries since the beginning of the 80ies, but not in all of the fruit growing countries.

    8. Re:And in 1985 by azalin · · Score: 1

      And let us not forget today's bikes are so much cooler than anything we had available back then.

    9. Re:And in 1985 by Kjella · · Score: 2

      They rode bicycles without a helmet -- nanny state hadn't passed mandatory helmet laws for bicycles back then -- and didn't die!

      You can drive for many, many years without a seat belt too, until the day you come to a very sudden and brutal stop. Serious head trauma is not a "learning experience" but more of a maiming experience. Cuts, scrapes and bruises, a twisted ankle or a few broken bones are learning experiences and plenty painful enough, generally without the risk of long-term/permanent injury or death. Besides they are going to bang their head in lesser ways, according to my parents I did a good headbutt with the living room table as I came running and slipped.

      In general I would say it's better to throw them out the door with as much padding as you deem necessary than to let them sit inside without it. I know I'd be much more ready to let my kids get into traffic and go places on their own with a helmet than without one, so it's not limiting them it's liberating them. Your head is the most important asset you got and it's only going to be more important in the future, the need for warm bodies is growing less and less each day. If there's any part of the body you should take care of, it's that.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    10. Re:And in 1985 by dbIII · · Score: 1

      They rode bicycles without a helmet -- nanny state hadn't passed mandatory helmet laws for bicycles back then -- and didn't die!

      Some did. Of all the possible examples you could have chosen you picked an utter loser.

  28. Look at this in context it makes sense by jsimon12 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1985 was only 1 year after the Ma Bell breakup and while the Macintosh was out IBM still dominated the PC business. So when you look at this in the context of the times it makes sense that they would think the network and infrastructure would be closed because that was the way things were during the time period. I am glad they aren't like that though I think with AT&T reformed and Apple controlling the whole experiance things might go back to the "Ma Bell" days :(

    1. Re:Look at this in context it makes sense by rs79 · · Score: 1

      "1985 was only 1 year after the Ma Bell breakup and while the Macintosh was out IBM still dominated the PC business."

      Well, yeah, but the PC business was only 2 years old. Soon IBM would have its first competitor: compaq.

      pdp11's, vax, sun, apollo, and any number of microprocessor based business systems abounded. the PC wasn't so certain in 85. I was able to avoid the wretched things till 88 or so.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    2. Re:Look at this in context it makes sense by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

      pdp11's, vax, sun, apollo, and any number of microprocessor based business systems abounded. the PC wasn't so certain in 85. I was able to avoid the wretched things till 88 or so.

      Yep. In the home, almost no one had a PC. It was Amiga/ST/C64/Atari 800/Spectrum and the odd Apple II. Business wise, I saw the odd PC but they never really took off until Win 3.x in the big way we now remember.

      --
      I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    3. Re:Look at this in context it makes sense by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      And most of those were some form of dumb terminal. With the technology of the time, it just made sense - who would want a power-sucking, noisy, expensive, high-maintainence piece of equipment like a computer in their home? It seemed more practical for the service provider to maintain those, and for home users to just have the basic hardware needed to access it remotely and rent what resources they need. And maybe play a few simple single-player games and do the most basic computational tasks like text editing and the family finances.

    4. Re:Look at this in context it makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So when you look at this in the context of the times it makes sense that they would think the network and infrastructure would be closed because that was the way things were during the time period. I am glad they aren't like that though [...]

      The price of an open network is eternal vigilance (cf. UN, SOPA/PIPA).

    5. Re:Look at this in context it makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " the PC wasn't so certain in 85. I was able to avoid the wretched things till 88 or so.

      Early adopter, eh? I was able to avoid the bastards until the mid-90s. Five years ago, a co-worker (a programmer) commented that it was truly impressive how little I knew about Windows. As someone who used VAXes in college and had been doing Unix all my professional life, I took that as a compliment.

  29. Did anyone else notice...? by mianne · · Score: 2

    One thing they definitely got wrong in this production was the direction the earth rotates on its axis.

    --
    Javascript, cookies, flash, and ActiveX must be enabled in order to view this sig.
  30. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by rs79 · · Score: 1

    they had ihnp4 as an example. what other conclusion could they have come up with?

    (the guy at 1:29 looks like Jim Fleming who signed of on it's replacement, ihnpss)

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
  31. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by jhoegl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually AoL was/is a self contained network, so it wasnt really on the internet.
    It did provide a gateway to it, and when I was on it in 1993, I found out after a year that it wasnt the internet like I thought. Instead AoL was nothing but a controlled network with a filtered and censored gateway to the real internet.
    Then i got a real ISP and enjoyed freedom ever since.

  32. Re:IBM is the Information Age. by jimmydevice · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the early 80's, Intel was working on the IAPX432 object oriented processor. This was a secure, mainframe class architecture that was quite revolutionary.
    Unfortunately, It was also slower then anything else available and was killed. due to industry disinterest, Mostly Intel's
    Too bad Intel didn't later revisit that path when the technology allowed this kind of architecture to be implemented to it's full potential.
    We would probably be programming in Lisp or Smalltalk now and the web would be a totally different place.
    We will probably see ISA extensions that support those ideas in the future.

  33. Get Real! by gnu-sucks · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Alright, so let's say the example in the video took place today:

    Company 1 in Europe has an idea for a part and contacts Company 2 in America to produce it:

    1) Company 1 googles and finds the name of a company in America to produce the part. They call the American company and it takes two hours to wade through the phone system menus and leave several voice mails and wait for a reply.

    2) Company 1 can't give any details without a signed NDA, and because of requirements from the company's lawyers, the NDA has to be faxed over, signed, and faxed back.

    3) Once they agree to work together, company 1 wants to send company 2 a copy of the design.
    3a) The email bounces because it was typed wrong due to international spelling differences
    3b) Once the email stops bouncing, it is picked up by a spam filter and nobody ever sees it
    3c) Since the email had a large attachment, microsoft exchange choked and the server admin had to come in on the weekend and rebuild the databases
    3d) After that, Company 1 decides to just put the file on an internal FTP server.
    3e) Company 2 isn't able to use FTP in windows without downloading a program from the internet, which involves getting permission from the IT department, registering the program with the developer, convincing the anti-virus software to allow the ftp program to run, etc etc
    3f) The server at Company 1, an older machine not frequently used, isn't firewalled correctly by an unintelligent cisco firewall product, and fails to correctly open the reverse datastream. The files never arrive, as the connections hang.
    3g) Company 1 gives up and uses Dropbox.
    3h) The files arrive at Company 2, but they are also intercepted by some Russian and Chinese hackers that easily evesdropped into their dropbox using a script inserted several months ago to look for interesting keywords.

    4) Many months pass, and finally the prototypes are shipped over to Europe, where it is discovered, the Americans did not convert metric units to English units correctly for each portion of the project, and nothing screws together.

    5) The hacked data is leaked to the highest paying competitor.

    The other futuristic situation, about the doctor, is equally obnoxious these days if you factor in HIPPA, incompatible data formats, and even lower IT standards.

    Let's face it, this started off as a great idea and became something quite different.

    1. Re:Get Real! by azalin · · Score: 1

      You are not exactly of the jolly persuasion, are you?
      PS: Just to be nitpicking: Windows does include a command line ftp prompt (and has for a while) and with newer versions ftp servers can be mapped directly from the windows explorer. Windows sucks, but not as bad as some would like it to.

    2. Re:Get Real! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work in architecture, we solved these problems about 10 years ago. Not everyone's implemented the solution, but 90% of our drawings at this point are PDFs. We send PDFs out, we get PDF shop drawings back. The only people really dealing with paper copies are the folks actually building the building: if you drop a 2x4 on a stack of drawings, they don't care.

      Buildings (metric or imperial) get built just fine, and we routinely ship ~1GB building models around the world with no problem.

    3. Re:Get Real! by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Yeah, globalization is a total pipe dream, it'll never happen!

    4. Re:Get Real! by dbIII · · Score: 1

      incompatible data formats

      Geophysics mostly solved that problem before the video was even made. Someone in my workplace was recently working on data recorded in 1982 and imported it directly into the application they were using with no more fuss than clicking on it in a file selection box.
      Most of the clusterfuck of incompatible file formats we see today is due to trade secrets triumphing over standards, to the insane point where even later versions of the same software cannot open files generated by earlier versions.

  34. Thought experiment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Replace the guy in the video with Mitt Romney. Damned funny.

  35. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 2

    Of course, as computer scientists we can say with utter certainty that the scare tactics at the end of the film were utterly unnecessary: the claim that countries other than France had Minitel ('video terminals in the home') fell apart rapidly, and expert systems and knowledge inference, the messiahs of 80s AI research, utterly failed to amount to anything. Even the Japanese Fifth Generation Computer System flopped due to a lack of market. In retrospect it's obvious that the end of the video was corporate propaganda meant for government consumption; perhaps even amusingly so. (And a little sad that TFA calls it 'preaching'.)

    The US was so far ahead in educated population at that point in time that the risk was always close to nil, no matter what national posturing was made, and the proof is in the import/export business: of the manufacturers who sold and supported machines in the US, the only non-American company was Bull—and they inherited their product line from Honeywell, who had bought it from GE, who had co-developed some of their most important offerings with MIT. So much for 18% of the US computing market, Japan. (Unless they meant Nintendo? Or the razor-thin manufacturing margins? Or components?)

    Still, it's cute to think of the US and Canada as competing...

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  36. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by somename · · Score: 1

    The AOL crowd showed up in the mid 90's and essentially destroyed the original internet culture. This was not an improvement.

    Well, AOL was merely the beginning of what was probably inevitable any way. Besides, Usenet(where AOL crowd's presence were really felt) is only a small part of the internet, and I'd say the internet is overall more useful place now because of its universal access. That said, I do miss the old Usenet. There just isn't anything quite like it, and I don't think there can ever be anything like it again. /. probably comes closest but not quite.

  37. The music by azalin · · Score: 1

    The music, it burns in my ears.

  38. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by LordLucless · · Score: 2

    It depends who the OP means by "we". I'm in Australia, and we didn't even get a connection into US ARPAnet until the early 1990s, and it was a satellite connection that served as the only outbound link for the entire country.

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  39. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by neokushan · · Score: 0

    There is one, it's called Slashdot. Use your moderator points properly and dumb posts aren't an issue.

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  40. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1

    I'm in Australia, and we didn't even get a connection into US ARPAnet until the early 1990s,

    There were a few connections around, though mostly through business or university mainframes. I remember messaging and playing Empire or Star Trek with one of those green fanfold keyboard consoles in the early '80s, then getting a bit more serious and using the WMC VAX system in the late '80s to explore. From memory, there was an X25 PAD over in Queensland that could hop over to the US.

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  41. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by LordLucless · · Score: 1

    I think the CSIRO had a connection in the 80s, but it wasn't always on. I think it connected on a schedule or something.

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  42. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    I can't say AoL destroyed the Internet

    It does altered the Net in some ways - such as the proliferation of smilies

    Smilies were started way before AoL, for sure. Even in the days of BBS - FidoNet - we were already using smilies

    But it was the AoL which popularized smilies, and they invented new crops of smilies, as well as many new "compacted words", such as "LOL", "STFU", and so on
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  43. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    you're exaggerating. http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76
    says the most generous interpretation ("current dollars") and
    worst schools and taking 1981 and not 1991 would be at least
    $2,000/year. in "2009" dollars, and averaging 1981 and 1991 would
    give you very best case of about $5500/year. your estimate is off
    by a factor of 7.

  44. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, all that existed before the internet ever caught on.

    smilies, text speak, all came from bbses.

    As one of the first 10,000 hooked to the actual internet. We had alot of potential until aol came along and got every moron on the planet hooked up. Then the marketers and mainstream ad people took notice. Everyone had to be on the internet.

    And that was the end of the internet potential.

    Now we're working on turning it into a tv channel.

  45. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by Narishma · · Score: 1

    Well, for a while in the early 90's it was looking like it would go that way. There were about half a dozen closed services like Compuserve, AOL or Genie with a relatively large number of subscribers each. Thankfully they were quickly overtaken by the open Internet.

    --
    Mada mada dane.
  46. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    I think the CSIRO had a connection in the 80s, but it wasn't always on. I think it connected on a schedule or something.

    The Internet as a batch job?

    An interesting concept indeed

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  47. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by RulerOf · · Score: 0

    There is one, it's called Slashdot. Use your moderator points properly and dumb posts aren't an issue.

    I would, but then I can't post on the same story, even if it's in a different comment thread.

    It sucks that the discussions I'd most like to spend my mod points on are also those in which I'm more likely to comment in, but that's just the way it is around here.

    I wonder if there's a solution to the conflict of interests that presents though. Perhaps they could unlock moderation on a discussion if your comment itself gets moderated?

    "Use em or lose em" they say. More often than not, I opt to lose them :P

    --
    Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
  48. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by neokushan · · Score: 0

    Sadly this is true, but I can understand their reasoning behind it - the -1 I disagree effect would be even more pronounced. Still, I don't see why they need to lock you out of the entire post, surely it could be done on a per-thread basis.

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  49. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    Umm... I didn't say that AOL "invented all the smilies", did I?

    However, I did say that AOl "popularize" the smilies as well as invented new crops of smilies

    As one of the first 10,000 hooked to the actual internet

    Then you and I are more or less, of the same batch

    One thing good about AOL (in those days) was that I got free diskettes, thanks to AOL :)
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  50. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Inda · · Score: 1

    I never witnessed that.

    I joined AOL a few years after 1993, I can't say when exactly. They were offering all-you-can-eat internet at a fixed price while others were still charging by the minute.

    Disk went it. AOL's crap was installed. That stupid audio file played.

    The next day, The Internet Logo (IE) was clicked, AOL dialed up, zip files on Geocities-type sites were downloaded. Not so different to how it happened for the years ahead.

    Of course I switched when proper cable internet access was available.

    --
    This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  51. How Quaint: A Pro-American Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, the good ol' days when American companies actually cared about their own country. Too bad the video couldn't foresee the
    present anarchy.

  52. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by demonlapin · · Score: 1

    Usenet certainly worked that way at a lot of sites for a long time.

  53. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Excellent point. They didn't just think that monolithic and centralized garbage was how it should be back then, they think it RIGHT NOW.

  54. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

    And today we still have closed social networks providers like Facebook. The game is still afoot, except at a higher level than the network protocols.

  55. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

    Hallo, me again.

    So it looks like I misfired the tone a little on my post. I was trying to capsule summary a couple of the big intersections in Microsoft's role in consumer computing on the net. Isn't that why MS had a Borg Gates icon for some 12 years? Instead I got a chain of insulting AC's. Oh well.

    All I meant was that in 1985 people my age were still playing games on their Commodore 64's, and we weren't aware of any way to get online for years later. 1995 was the iconic year of a new Win95 computer running Netscape.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  56. Thank Al Gore by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Any time you hear someone lying about "Al Gore said he invented the Internet", tell them they're lying:

    Al Gore did not claim he "invented" the Internet, nor did he say anything that could reasonably be interpreted that way. The "Al Gore said he 'invented' the Internet" put-downs were misleading, out-of-context distortions of something he said during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN's "Late Edition" program on 9 March 1999. When asked to describe what distinguished him from his challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, Gore replied (in part):

    During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.

    Gore saw the 1980s "Information Superhighway" and saw the future. His leadership got the Internet protected and funded as one of the great Federal programmes of all time, along with the Apollo programme. Without Gore the Internet today would probably be either long dead, or still some obscure government system only Feds and giant corporate cronies use (eg. solely to spy on you). The Reagan/Bush recession wouldn't have ended under Clinton/Gore with the greatest wealth creation of all time. You wouldn't be reading this on Slashdot.

    The Internet is one of the things that fulfills America's promise. Thank Al Gore for being among the few who recognized its value back among the blips and bleeps, and among the fewer who actually did anything about it.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Thank Al Gore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What part of "I" don't you understand? You must be one of the people that is also confused as to what the definition of 'is' is. The fact is he is taking sole credit in that statement. We know he didn't do it himself, but his statement implies he did it himself. You can debate whether or not he spoke improperly and forgot to include the people that did. A better statement would have been, "..., I took the initiative to create funding on a national level to spread the use of the Internet". Had he said that no one would disagree. Admit it, it was an oversimplified statement which he should have clarified in the next sentence he spoke. But he didn't. In other words he was and still is a bag of wind, big talker, big-timer, bigmouth, blatherskite, blowhard, blusterer, boaster, brag, braggadocio, bragger, egotist, exhibitionist, gasbag, gascon, grandstander, hotshot, know-it-all, peacock, ranter, raver, show-off, strutter, swaggerer, swashbuckler, swelled head, trumpeter, and most of all a windbag.

    2. Re:Thank Al Gore by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Yes, he tool sole credit for what he actually did: he took the initiative to get the funding for specific programs. He didn't just spread the use of the Internet; his funding created the Internet. During the "Reagan Revolution", when "Conservatives" like the ones you're still voting for were dismantling any public investment within reach (as long is it wasn't the sacred military).

      If Gore had said anything more to "clarify", you and your fellow Republicans would be calling him a windbag for saying another sentence. "No one would disagree"? There isn't a sentence mathematically possible that Al Gore could say about anything that you Republicans wouldn't disagree with, in unison, 24x7 on thousands of monopoly news propaganda channels.

      He didn't speak improperly. He didn't have to share credit for getting the programs approved and funded. That was leadership, it was hard work, "Conservatives" like you tried and failed to stop it. He was running for president, when it's time to take credit for the work like that. And in fact he won that election, though "Conservatives" like you and the ones you always vote for did nothing but steal it, just like they pick the bones of everything within reach.

      People like you make things like the Internet rare. People like Gore make things like the Internet.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  57. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    AOL wasn't "on the Internet", it was just gatewayed to it. But AOL's people were thereby "on the Internet", and their flood of stupidity ruined the aboriginal Internet culture. They could post directly to Usenet and the Web; the posting sites changed to feed their appetite, and the idiocracy took over.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  58. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    AOL didn't charge a fixed price for Internet access. AOL charged by the hour for years after offering Internet access. In fact it remained one of the last ISPs to charge by the hour, or for any usage rate, until the mobile monopolies could finally get into that racket.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  59. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by crazyjj · · Score: 1

    the original internet culture

    You mean back when it was a handful of uber-geeks at a few universities talking to each other via text-only? Before we had Wikipedia, Google, and the hundreds of other useful internet sites that make daily life so much better now?

    I was one of those handful of geeks, mind you, and I'm the first to admit that things SUCKED back then compared to now. No way would I trade the modern internet for the days when gopher was the best we had. You go back to your "original internet culture" if you want to. I'm staying here.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
  60. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by MisterSquid · · Score: 1

    AOL was important because it was the first (and for a while the only) ISP with national modem-pool coverage. When traveling, you didn't have to pay long-distance to access the Internet. Instead, you could just dial the local batch of AOL modems and avoid per-minute charges from Ma Bell.

    --
    blog
  61. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by timeOday · · Score: 1

    The whole appeal put across in the video is very nationalistic. They used words like "we" to refer to both the US and AT&T. I don't think this would happen any more. Today companies are global, so they are rivals with government, shopping the globe for the most business-friendly laws and taxes. The idea of the "The Japanese" taking the lead in artificial intelligence doesn't make a lot of sense anymore.

  62. One Big Data Center idea by eoi · · Score: 1

    Yes, the whole idea in that film was that central control (hmm, like Ma Bell?) was crucial. But even then DEC was showing that IBM's fanatically controlled One Big Data Center idea was crazy. The failure of Japan's 5th Generation, France's central system, AOL, etc. followed. To date myself, I remember working at HEW in 1973, and bringing my punched cards to the computer center, where I was at the mercy of the arbitrary manager. I hated it! The control freaks ruled (but soon after, we got a timeshare system and were liberated). So AT&T wanted a centralized government subsidized telecommunications system run by guess who. Not surprising. I guess I should throw in Ada, too: centralized, government sponsored language. What is surprising is how effective decentralized open source projects have been.

    1. Re:One Big Data Center idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, now we have a nearly centralized internet controlled by Google, with some proprietary Amazon and Apple data centers. The only difference is the company in charge has changed...

  63. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's a good word for it. idiocracy. Because that's exactly what happened.

    The mainstream masses of aolusers flooded the net. And brought their friends and family too.

    And like with everything else mainstream. It's mediocre at best because outstanding gets bought up or shut down.

    I miss the early days of the net. Where i could go talk to someone anywhere on the planet. And it was almost a given they were NOT a moron or asshole in general. You could count on most of them being intelligent, open minded, interesting and educated.

    Now....
    "Ok poop is comming out." :(

  64. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

    2 years if you skimped on something - tuition and fees were roughly $500 / semester for 18 hours. Books added another $50 / class on average, so about $300, unless you were in engineering, in which case they ran more. And yes, I do remember, because I paid for it.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  65. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by slew · · Score: 1

    Still, it's cute to think of the US and Canada as competing...

    The video makes a oblique reference to the Canadian Alextel which was technically like its French minitel counterpart, but never really got off the ground and deemed destroyed by the internet by the '90's.

    However, for a while Canadian RIM was quite a competitor with US companies with their proprietary email network. Now, not so much... Ironically, this company was probably also destroyed by the internet...

  66. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    AOL wasn't "on the Internet", it was just gatewayed to it."

    I'm pretty sure that's how everybody does it these days.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  67. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Yep 1995, that's when I installed linux so I could get full speed out of my expensive 14.4kb/s modem instead of the crap serial port behaviour on Win95 that limited it to 9.6kb/s. MS Windows wasn't remotely ready for the internet back then even when they were given a TCP/IP stack for free.

  68. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Even later than that I had to use FTP via email to get some files because of a lack of connectivity. The Australian chunk of the internet actually went downhill for a while after it was taken away from the Universities and handed over to the thing that became the evil waste of space known as Telstra.

  69. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by dbIII · · Score: 1

    At one point things could be discussed seriously on newsgroups in the *.sci.* areas with people leading their feilds without anyone bringing up Nazis. Some good things were lost even if there's a huge number of improvements elsewhere.

  70. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by dbIII · · Score: 1

    The US was so far ahead in educated population at that point in time that the risk was always close to nil

    Only in comparison with undeveloped portions of the world. If you look at the rise of Intel and just about everything else in Silicon Valley at the time it was investment that encouraged the best and brightest to come from everywhere, which had nothing to do with US education one way or another. Japan, the UK, France and certainly nothing on mainland Asia was ready or willing to do anything like that, especially any of the government programs.

  71. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by timeOday · · Score: 1

    Of course, as computer scientists we can say with utter certainty that the scare tactics at the end of the film were utterly unnecessary

    If anything I'd say the scaremongering was amazingly effective - not prophetic, but causal. AT&T pitches to the US government to invest in a global information "highway." Here we are 25 years later, boom, that's exactly what happened. The US goverment did invest in the Internet, through companies like AT&T and Mitre, and now it exists, and US-based Internet companies such as Amazon, google, and Facebook are well ahead of the International competition and making billions of dollars, due in part to home-field advantage. (In fact there is great caterwauling about the prospect more global management of the Internet under the auspices of the UN).

  72. Intel is the Information Age. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure those ideas can be grafted onto present processors. What I found interesting is just how early Intel was working on such an advanced chip. The web wouldn't be the only thing changed if they had succeeded.

  73. all the internet IPs in /etc/hosts by peter303 · · Score: 1

    I remember before there were hierarchical name servers, we kept the list-of-the-internet on each of our computers and updated it weekly. Above about 10K names its got cumbersome.

  74. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, for a while in the early 90's it was looking like it would go that way. There were about half a dozen closed services like Compuserve, AOL or Genie with a relatively large number of subscribers each. Thankfully they were quickly overtaken by the open Internet.

    As someone who was using uucp networking, those names meant nothing to me. If you couldn't send email to their users, they were just play-pretend networks for toy computer users.

  75. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    Sure, they had impact, but the fears were unfounded. All of the videotex networks except France's fell apart, Japan never gained the market dominance they sought in the US, and the fifth-generation computer was as unpopular as its American and European contemporaries.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  76. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

    Wow... a time when student loans actually got you somewhere and did not put you into debt until you were 60.

  77. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by timeOday · · Score: 1

    True, the competition failed to live up to its hype. So did the proposed timeframe for the Internet. The predictions I noticed in the video mentioned a time horizon around 5 years (1990), whereas it seems things materialized rather more slowly than that. It's funny, because I wouldn't feel comfortable proposing anything for even 5 years out. And anything that might take 10 years hardly even seems worth talking about, since nobody can imagine what the company will even be doing by then. It seems like it would be so great to work uninterrupted towards a 5 year goal.

  78. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

    Not quite - you still had to eat and sleep. 2 years of grad school wound up running roughly 22K. For comparison: a year's salary for the average grad had dropped to around 25-30K provided you could find a job, much like today; and housing in a "cheap" neighborhood started at over $30K near the school, and $90K where I started working. These would be 40+ year old houses, new I didn't bother looking at.

    BTW, this was a well funded public school - I was lucky - tuition went up 5 fold while I was there, and has since doubled a few more times. $3 a semester hour was pretty awesome, but also somewhat unrealistic. equivalent public schools elsewhere or private were 5-50 times more expensive. So the correction happened while I was there.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  79. Re:Not bad, but they were dead wrong about one thi by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

    Want a PhD? :)

    I think the surest way to get something done is to swear it'll happen in 5 years and not be disappointed when it takes 15.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  80. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

    but you had the benefit of massive inflation in wages that People in their late 20's and early 30's will probably not have so their loans will not shrink as quickly or as in much magnitude as a part of their income as they enter their 40's.

  81. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

    after a few years of deflation, is usually followed by massive inflation. The cycle has yet to be broken.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  82. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

    then I can't wait....the only problem is that inflation adjusted Wages have decreased drastically since the 80's.

  83. Re:Welcome to the Information Age by nobodie · · Score: 1

    You don't RC, I had a portable phone in a bag the size of a lunchbox that I used on my job (on-site construction supervision) in the early 80's. Damn thing was big and weighed a ton but saved me more times than i can even remember. I bought the phone myself to convince my boss it was worthwhile. He happily pciked up the $.50 a minute call charge. Later I switched to a car phone in my truck which was exactly the same kit, but was just built in, under the front seat, with a mike on the cieling and a separate speaker from the audio.
    Now I bluetooth to the car, much better, really.

    --
    Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.