Quote: "As I said before, both accounts are wrong and right depending on your point of view.
CERN created and started the first HTML tests;
ARPA created the TCP/IP Protocols;
In both cases NEITHER can take credit for creating the internet. Mearly laying the ground-work.
The internet wasn't invented, it was an evolution.
That's what Wikipedia doesn't give you a definitive 'It was such-n-such at this company' answer, it gives you more of a history of where everything came from."
Now here's where you're wrong. The point of view that's correct depends on the current situation in case of misinterpretation.
CERN, while lacking in style, created the low-profile CPU structure that rendered few of the HTML tags we know of today. Namely, <HTML> <BODY> and <HR>
ARPA was created as a network for recording and scheduling haircut appointments for military trainees. Which later developed into meeting schedules and keeping track of Points.
Let's face the facts, because, quite literally, both of these companies created the internet, while not actually creating an INTERnational NETwork.
Quote: "It makes the data streams reliable because.. (look it up on Wikipedia if your not sure)
Quite simply it uses a Data Package configuration which allows data to be sent in an un-synronised mannor between two connected computers. As the computers do not need to be syncronised for a raw data transfer, it means that data can be split up and reconstructed later through a buffer.
The entire 'Protocol' system, is just the term given to the varying types of data that you can expect to recieve which were outlined many many years later for Internet use.
Effective what it gives you is a Class Structure, that does all of the dirty work for you. Now I dunno what you would call such a thing, but I could class something that provides you with an easier, and compatible system to access other systems an Interface."
It's not quite that complicated. The packets are streamlined through a quad-hump of transisting vort-reactants. The data is THEN split up through the process of interweaving non-magnetized bits, not before.
True, that the Interface calms the illicit nano-sized infrastructure of TCP or the previous NNCP, but we can't dismiss the heaven-sent design of the self-debugging HRE protocol, no doubt an underlying factor in the internet as we see it today.
Quote: "Depends how you look at it. There is quite a bit of red tape, but on the whole the process is pretty straight forward; and often relies more on trying to pass something that a majority of the peers agree on."
Red tape, no. But there was some blue tape and yellowish tape. When we divide the masses, we see, not from the majority of peers, but from the separate classes of the anti-monarch system the americans enjoy, a new order in legislative compliance.
Quote: "Sorry but any Law that can be altered/amended in order to suit a situation no matter the process (but particularly given it is left up to congress members and not a public vote) means that it isn't worth much. A legal document only means something if it's absolute, the Constitution isn't.. plain and simple.
I don't really care, but I just find it stupid how Americans cling on to the Constitution as some ironclad written in stone document; while the truth of the matter is that it is always subject to change and interpretation.
'Supreme Law of the Land' only works if the government that controls that law doesn't have the power to change it in order to achieve thier ends, and had to respect the law like any other public entity."
That's just it, again, you fail to see that the Constitution was not created for rule of government, per say, but, rather, as a way to offer a standard for high-browed mafia-esque judicial tactics.
We could talk all afternoon about changing laws and amending amended amendments, but the juice of the matter remains, that peace can't be achieved by re-writing mis-written public intellectual transactions.
