Journal lheal's Journal: The Internet, Al Gore, and Universal Myopia 3
When Al Gore, Jr. got to Congress in 1976, the Internet was already experiencing exponential growth. People were discovering the benefits of connecting computers together, much the way their forebears discovered that yes, they could find a use for a telephone in their home after all.
In 1989-90, I was a student at the University of Illinois, working in a little computer lab. By then, the Internet was growing at 8% per month. A coworker predicted that in 10 years, everyone's toaster and fridge would be on the Internet.
"No", I told him, "only computer geeks will ever use the Internet." That was before the web took over. We were both wrong, or perhaps, while I wasn't looking, the definition of "geek" changed.
The first time I saw a URL on a billboard, I felt a twinge of grief. My Internet wasn't mine any more. It was everyone's, just as it always wanted to be.
At any rate, the Internet was exploding, and it wasn't due to the efforts of any one person. There are certain forces in history that gain momentum and will just happen, regardless of the efforts of individuals to aid or deter them. Congressman Gore was on the right side of the curve, and his leadership was well-known in academic circles, but the importance of the Internet in the sweep of history dwarfs the ability of any one person to have much influence on it.
In fact, that's probably why people lampoon him so much for saying he "created the Internet". He was drawing on his viewpoint in government, that here was a tiny little program with a budget of much less than a billion dollars a year, which he championed until it became a phenomenal success. From his point of view, he did create the Internet.
All of us have tunnel vision. We are only able to see things through the lens of our own environment, our own experiences.
In the U.S., before 9/11/01, we didn't think terrorism could happen here. Sure, there was the first Trade Center attack, which we promptly ignored. Then there was the Oklahoma City bombing, which we attributed to right-wing anger over the disaster at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco a year to the day earlier.
We had blinders on. Terrorism happened in Europe and the Middle East. Here, the Good Guys always stopped them. That's the way the movies show it.
Now we're forced to recognize that we can have terrorist attacks here. Probably VP Gore felt the same dawn of recognition when he realized that worldwide adoption of internetworked computers was not his doing. To a lesser degree, I felt the same sudden change in my world when I saw "http://...." on that billboard.
I wonder what I can't see now.
Can we lambast people for what they actually say? (Score:2)
Please read this link, [seclists.org] then consider whether you feel Gore deserves that much lampooning. If you disagree with the guy's policies, critiicize him for that. If you disagree with his actions, criticize him for that. If you think that beard he grew looks stupid, criticize him for that. If you think he has been a hypocrite over tobacco, criticize him for that.
But do you really want to criticize a guy for
Re:Can we lambast people for what they actually sa (Score:2)
I'm not done with it yet. I'm just using VP Gore's statement to show that from his point of view at the time, he was responsible for the explosion of the Internet in the '90s. The point of that is that we are all prisoners of our own environments, hence there is universal myopia.
I guess you proved my point, though, even before I made it.
So, is this your final draft ? (Score:2)
We are all subject to observer effects. Fine. But "using Gore's statement" to support that point doesn't work if you build your argument around a statement Gore never made.
On Monday I heard an interview, on CNN, abo