more on Setting history straight: So, who really did invent the Internet?

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <shap () eros-os org>
Date: May 3, 2005 6:18:27 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] more on Setting history straight: So, who really  
did invent the Internet?


[Possibly for IP]

On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 14:18 -0400, David Farber wrote:

> It was cost-effective to use both packet
> switching and line switching even at monopoly prices. We made all
> kinds of hybrid internetworking. Much of it was a set of really ugly
> kludges, but innovation and creativity were certainly not stifled by
> using infrastructure provided by rigid monopolies. On the contrary,
> finding new ways to route information more cheaply by using different
> underlying services in different countries and areas led to a large
> number of innovative gateways.

In the U.S., there arose a curious kind of expertise among people who
were setting up new sites. People would keep track of the (sometimes
bizarre) tariff structure provided by AT&T and would lease capacity
according to what was cheaper rather than following AT&T's intended use
for a given service. For example, you were *supposed* to lease DSN lines
for digital subscriber networks at one point, but in practice the ASN
(analog subscriber network) lines were identical and a lot of people
leased those instead to avoid the higher tariff on DSN lines.

It's mildly interesting to contrast AT&T's reaction to RIAA's recent
behavior. AT&T certainly *could* have been very difficult, and taken a
number of technical measures to force people to lease the intended lines
at the then-higher costs. They concluded that this was a losing game. In
contrast to AT&T's behavior then, RIAA today is fighting the inevitable.
Every independent study I have seen says that there simply has been NO
loss of music to piracy -- those people weren't buying anyway -- and the
*real* cause of the fall in music sales is that people just don't like
the music that much or have shifted their attention to other interests.
Instead of figuring out how to produce something that people want, RIAA
and friends are trying to regulate the world. (Kinda like SCO tried to).

It's also interesting to contrast AT&T's handling of digital subscribers
with today's handling of analog service by Verizon and the "baby bells".
Instead of embracing the realization that the phone company is just a
bit conduit and figuring out how to make a sound business out of the
very strong incumbent position that every baby bell possesses (namely:
wires to your house), the baby bells are trying to push water uphill by
attempting to regulate VOIP services offered by competitors. They should
instead be trying to deregulate the voice business as fast as possible.

shap



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/