The Birth of the Internet
From wsuwiki
Contents |
How It All Began
The first step towards creating what we call the Internet today began in the late 1960’s by the Advanced Research Projects Administration(ARPA)[1]. It began as a simple network called ARPANET, developed by the Department of Defense who is the central agency for the creation of ARPA as well. The main purpose for the creation of ARPANET was to link together computers at major universities and defense contractors, allowing researchers at those institutions to exchange valuable information and data[2]. During the 1970 and early 1980’s ARPANET grew, various similar networks were also established primarily between universities. Many of these universities were comprised of many different types of computers so a standard TCP/IP protocol had to be adopted in order to allow these computers to interconnect amongst each other. As the backbone of the internet was being created the National Science Foundation (NSF) funded the establishment of NASFNET a major TCP/IP network that connected six smaller NSF-funded national supercomputing centers. Interest fueled the idea of being able to connect and exchange data between two or more computers in different regions, so IBM, Merit, MCI, and the state of Michigan began to bid and eventually win the contract from NSF to upgrade NSFNET to a T-1 speed (1.544 megabits per second (Mbps)), on top of interconnecting several additional research networks[3]. An official NSFNET backbone for the Internet was completed in 1988 which connected 13 regional networks together[4]. Universities would connect to these regional networks which would thus connect to the central backbone of the NSFNET. There were no charges for regional networks to connect to NSFNET, however regional networks charged monthly fees to smaller networks such as universities for their connections.
On April 30, 1995 federal support for the NSFNET backbone ended, three years prior to this date NSF had announced that it had intentions of phasing out from the picture and encouraged private entities to create their own private backbones[5]. As history shows us indeed that is what occurred and since the 1990’s the internet has expanded beyond military, scientific and university use to include businesses and individual users connecting through Internet Service Providers such as Comcast and AT&T.
Web 1.0
It is important in understanding that since the birth of the Internet, there is a consensus among Internet experts out there that the Internet itself has been through two development phases thus far. One is Web 1.0 and the second is Web 2.0, which will be discussed later on. Now let us focus on Web 1.0 and observe what software’s, hardware’s, techniques and patterns were used during the development stage. Since the Internet’s development stages build upon each other it would be difficult to say exactly when Web 1.0 ended and Web 2.0 began. However if the following principles are followed then an educated estimation approach can be taken in differentiating amongst Internet Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 development stages.
Web 1.0 sites are static[6]: Web pages are filled with information however they do not allow room for change, growth or interaction. There is a lack of an incentive for user’s to return to the website other than obtaining the needed information. An example of a Web 1.0 webpage might be a personal page created by someone working for a corporation that only gives out information regarding the corporation and has no further use other than that.
Web 1.0 sites do not allow for contribution: User’s can only visit these sites; there is a lack of interaction and or contribution amongst these sights. User’s cannot alter, modify, code, or build upon any ideas or content within the websites.
Web 1.0 applications are proprietary: In the Web 1.0 philosophy companies develop software applications that users can download, however cannot see how they work or are able to alter. The content provided by companies is treated as controlled property and is seen more as a privilege given to user’s rather than a gift. An example would be Netscape’s Navigator which was a proprietary Web browser in the Web 1.0 era[7].
Web 2.0
Web 2.0 is characterized by seven principles. It is important to know that we are currently in the Web 2.0 Internet development stage. The day when Web 2.0 ends and Web 3.0 begins might come sooner than we think, again an approximate date may be difficult to pinpoint, nevertheless if the seven principles are applied it will be possible to differentiate amongst future Internet development era's to come.
1. Web as a platform[8]:Product is not sold or packaged, but instead delivered as a service, with customers paying directly or indirectly for that service. No scheduled software releases just continuous improvement. No license or sale, just usage. A perfect example of company that utilizes web as a platform is Google.
2.Harnessing Collective Intelligence[9]: Using the internet as a means of a global brain, allowing people to contribute their thoughts, ideas, and opinions. Allowing people to collaborate their ideas and thoughts on projects for the betterment of a final project with many different perspectives taken into place. Hyper linking enables web of connections to grow in accordance with the amount of activity of web users. A collective directory of links that with participation of users makes for a more optimized search result. Examples of companies who harness collective intelligence are: Amazon, Ebay, and Google.
3.Data is the Next Intel[10]: Database management of information is essential to this principle. Core data will be seen more than just information but instead as a gateway to gain a competitive edge within the market. Companies who utilize the right data and protect it carefully will be the winners in this era. Companies who exemplify this principle are Google’s web crawl and Amazon’s long tail techniques.
4.End of software release[11]: Software must be delivered as a service not a product. The way a company operates must be more than just a daily task they must make it a core competency. Developers must maintain the service software on a daily basis instead of treating it as an artifact in order to maintain a sustainable competitive advantage. Users must be treated as co-developers being able to contribute with user interaction to the overall quality of the service.
5.Lightweight Programming Models[12]: Design and develop with the idea of partnership not planned coordination. Companies must allow for software to be hacked into and the ability to remix software. Services should be designed with the idea in mind of endless possibilities by collaboration of ideas and abilities.
6.Software above Any Single Level of Device[13]: The design of software and applications cannot be limited anymore to just one PC platform. Content should be designed with allowance of handheld devices to be able to access massive web-back ends, with the PC acting as a local cache and control station. The handheld device should be seen as another gateway or means to access that service. iTunes is a company that exemplifies this principle.
7. Rich-User Experience[14]: Design software and applications to make user’s feel like they are part of the creation. Users must feel important such as their interaction with the software is contributing to the betterment of the overall quality of the service. Trust user’s as co-developers and allow them freedom of expression and free will to roam and contribute as they please.
Current Issues Facing the Internet
The internet faces the issues of Net Neutrality and lack of funding for infrustructure to increase bandwith, speed and availabiltiy for all.
Net neutrality is a principle that is proposed by many advocates who wish to keep the internet unregulated by Internet Service Providers (ISP). The theory behind net neutrality states that the internet should be free from restrictions in content, applications, platforms and websites; this also includes the actual speed of how the material is delivered as well[15].
Proponents for Net Neutrality: Companies such as Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Vonage and Ebay are strong supporters of keeping the internet neutral[16]. They argue that as early as the 1960’s the internet has always been free from regulation and has led to the innovation in applications, software and the internet itself[17]. The argument is given that if ISP’s find a way to regulate the internet, eventually it would stifle innovation and create entry barriers into the internet market for upcoming businesses. Their classic example is that if net neutrality does not exist that there is a chance they would have never existed either. Net regulation in theory would prevent the next MySpace, Twitter or Google from ever emerging. Internet regulation could also pose a threat to the economy since E-commerce is vastly growing and accounts for a large percentage of consumer’s consumption in the economy. These companies also feel that discrimination of content and the freedom of expression would also be eradicated, since the internet is one of the only places where people can see and do as they please without feeling regulated by someone else.
Opponnents for Net Regulation: Major ISP’s such as Comcast, AT&T and Verizon feel that websites such as Google and YouTube should have to pay fees and expenses to deliver content to consumers over the Internet. As of now ISP’s charge consumers for use of bandwidth over the internet, yet multimillion dollar companies do not get charged for delivery of content[18]. Companies such as Google do still have their own fees such as server storage, advertisement, Information Technology Management, etc. ISP’s argue that it is not about just obtaining shares and profits from major Internet companies, but more importantly to maintain effective speeds for consumers who need the bandwidth more than others. Internet Service Providers would like to treat the internet as a utility, use as directed, and nevertheless pay accordingly to the amount of usage not only for the consumer but also for content delivery websites. The classic medical internet example is used: A student at a medical school is preparing to undertake their surgical practices via video conference with another doctor/instructor half across the world, however cannot do so due to the lagging of speeds from a hardcore gamer living in the basement of his parent’s house. ISP’s argue that by regulating the internet, it can thus fuel innovation in infrastructure and bring about faster bandwidth speeds and more availability to all people regardless of their location.
Future of the Internet
While the exact future of the Internet may be impossible to predict there are many possible paths it can unravel into. In the mid 1990’s major telecom companies were unsure if they could even fund the ever growing Internet, which sent techno critics into a frenzy and made them fear the idea of the internet being privatively owned and operated[19]. History demonstrates that this has not been the case and that the Internet has grown immensely since its birth. By 2015 Kevin Kelly who is a writer for the Wired Magazine predicts that the Internet will be ruled by messy media and messy participation. He explains that in 2004, 175,000 books were published and more than 30,000 music albums were released in the United States, while at the same time 14 million blogs were launched worldwide[20]. Kevin Kelly theorizes that everyone in the near future (on average) will write a song, author a book, make a video, craft a weblog, and or code a program[21]. This in return will leave the question of who will be the consumer of such material and content if everyone is out there being composers. The answer to that question is that WE will be the consumers while at the same time contributing by collaborative interaction. The term prosumption can be applied when consumers both produce and consume simultaneously. The future of the web will be more than just an arena of participation, The Pew Internet & America Life Project surveyed more than 1,200 professionals in 2004, asking them to predict the Net’s next decade and what it would look like[22]. Two-thirds of those who were surveyed agreed that computing devices would become embedded in everything from clothes, to appliances to cars to phones, which would allow for greater surveillance by government officials and the business sector[23]. One-third of the respondents believe that by 2014, use of the Internet will increase the size of people’s social networks far beyond what has traditionally been the case[24]. When John Gage Internet guru and innovator said, “The network is the computer”, Kevin Kelly went on to develop the idea of what he calls the Machine from Gage's saying. Kelly believes that in the near future this huge Machine that will be a mega-supercomputer that encompasses the Internet, all of its services, all peripheral chips and affiliated devices from scanners to satellites, and billions of human minds will all be entangled in this global network[25]. The Machine will think for us, it will anticipate disturbances and avoid them, eliminate viruses and denial-of-service of attacks the moment they are launched, learn how to weed out spam through repetition and patterns. The Machine will attempt to use intuition to bring us answers and satisfaction. It will no longer just be a piece of hardware and software, but instead the Machine will be artificial intelligence. The strongest attribute that the Machine has is that it’s always on and it’s constantly learning, in its existence the Internet has had zero downtime in 10 years (30 if you want to be specific). We should all marvel at the fact that never in history have humans and computers/electronics ever been so interconnected. Whether any possible futures explained occur or not, one this is certain the Internet is ever growing and it is here to stay.
References
Kelly, Kevin. "We are the Web." Wired Magazine 08 January 2005: 1-5. Web. 29 Oct 2009. <http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.08/tech.html>.
O'Reilly, Tim. "What is Web 2.0." O'Reilly Media 30 August 2005: 1-5. Web. 25 Oct 2009. <http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html>.
Hahn, Robert W. and Wallsten, Scott (2006) "The Economics of Net Neutrality," The Economists' Voice: Vol. 3 : Iss. 6, Article 8. <http://www.bepress.com/ev/vol3/iss6/art8 >
Strickland, Jonathan. "Is there a Web 1.0?." HowStuffWorks 14 March 2005: 1-3. Web. 31 Oct 2009. <http://computer.howstuffworks.com/web-10.htm>.
Werbach, Kevin. "Digital Tornado: The Internet and Telecommunications Policy." Federal Communications Commision 29. (1997): 12. Web. 28 Oct 2009. <http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OPP/working_papers/oppwp29.pdf>.