What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

"The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

Naturally someone researched this and it turns out that the government didn't create the Internet either....

by the 1960s technologists were trying to connect separate physical communications networks into one global network—a "world-wide web." The federal government was involved, modestly, via the Pentagon's Advanced Research Projects Agency Network. Its goal was not maintaining communications during a nuclear attack, and it didn't build the Internet. Robert Taylor, who ran the ARPA program in the 1960s, sent an email to fellow technologists in 2004 setting the record straight: "The creation of the Arpanet was not motivated by considerations of war. The Arpanet was not an Internet. An Internet is a connection between two or more computer networks." [emphasis added]

If the government didn't invent the Internet, who did? Vinton Cerf developed the TCP/IP protocol, the Internet's backbone, and Tim Berners-Lee gets credit for hyperlinks.

But full credit goes to the company where Mr. Taylor worked after leaving ARPA: Xerox. It was at the Xerox PARC labs in Silicon Valley in the 1970s that the Ethernet was developed to link different computer networks. Researchers there also developed the first personal computer (the Xerox Alto) and the graphical user interface that still drives computer usage today.

According to a book about Xerox PARC, "Dealers of Lightning" (by Michael Hiltzik), its top researchers realized they couldn't wait for the government to connect different networks, so would have to do it themselves. "We have a more immediate problem than they do," Robert Metcalfe told his colleague John Shoch in 1973. "We have more networks than they do." Mr. Shoch later recalled that ARPA staffers "were working under government funding and university contracts. They had contract administrators . . . and all that slow, lugubrious behavior to contend with."

So having created the Internet, why didn't Xerox become the biggest company in the world? The answer explains the disconnect between a government-led view of business and how innovation actually happens


excerpt from a longer article in today's Wall St. Journal.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444464304577539063008406518.html?mod=opinion_newsreel
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

It was a poorly written speech which probably should've used "those" instead of "that,"
At long last, our society has a shining example of why grammar is important.

Attention, Obama speechwriters: didn't you pay any attention between 2001 and 2009?
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

Here are examples of what he meant:

Punctuation - Whoever wrote the transcript wrote the puncuation a specific way. It could easily have been written this way:

"Somebody invested in roads and bridges, if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that."

Are you 100% sure that he meant businesses? It doesn't appear so if you continue...

Comment clarification - Obama followed up that point with a clarification phrase:

"Somebody invested in roads and bridges, if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

So the clarification is of infrastructure (roads) not being built by businesses...by showing other examples of infrastructure (internet) that didn't get built by businesses. Why would he clarify business owners not building their own business by completely changing the topic to infrastructure not getting built on its own?

Intent of the whole passage - The whole intent of the passage was "The point is, when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together."

Why would the major summation of his point be 'we succeed because of our individual initiative' if he meant 'we do not succeed because of our individual intiative' (as you didn't build your own business would imply)?
By your standards he could have said , "if your a teacher, you didn't build that". Or, "If you belong to a Union, you didn't build that", "If your a lawyer, you didn't build that", If you're an immigrant, you didn't build that", "if you're white, you didn't build that"......
Have businesses been trying to pass legislation that will keep non-business folks off the road? Why single out businesses? (That's a rhetorical question given his similar disdain for capitalism)
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

By your standards he could have said , "if your a teacher, you didn't build that". Or, "If you belong to a Union, you didn't build that", "If your a lawyer, you didn't build that", If you're an immigrant, you didn't build that", "if you're white, you didn't build that"......
Have businesses been trying to pass legislation that will keep non-business folks off the road? Why single out businesses? (That's a rhetorical question given his similar disdain for capitalism)

Although your point isn't rationale that he meant business ifself vs. roads, that is actually a good question as to why he positioned it as businesses not having built infrastructure. He probably could have said 'the individual didn't built that (roads)'.

The only thing I can think of as to why its roads and not some other organization...is that business is so good at satifying societal needs that is that business is the natural fallback to create everything for society. Oh...and fortune 500 companies pay...well, we'll just say...plenty for my 'distain'.
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

Why single out businesses? (That's a rhetorical question given his similar disdain for capitalism)
What do you base the "disdain for capitalism" statement on, other than a narrative that the GOP has been trying to ram down your throat (apparently successfully) for the last 4 years? Obama's been way too friendly to the "free market" for my tastes, but if there's something that is inarguable after his first term is that he's the best friend capitalism has had in the US since the 80's.

As far as "singling out business," the backdrop of that speech, and of this election in general, is the GOP's adoption of the Social Darwinist trope that there is no such thing as society, nobody owes anybody anything, citizenship is about rights but not responsibilities, and wealth correlates 100% with usefulness, ability, and intelligence. One side in this debate is all the way over to 11 pushing its radical view that unfettered, unregulated free market capitalism where a few win and everybody else loses should be our economic system. Obama is trying to re-center the debate (I think, way still too far to the right of the real center of practical choices) because we saw just a few years ago the disaster that moving that far out onto the edge causes.
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

Here are examples of what he meant:

Punctuation - Whoever wrote the transcript wrote the puncuation a specific way. It could easily have been written this way:

"Somebody invested in roads and bridges, if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that."

Are you 100% sure that he meant businesses? It doesn't appear so if you continue...

Comment clarification - Obama followed up that point with a clarification phrase:

"Somebody invested in roads and bridges, if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

So the clarification is of infrastructure (roads) not being built by businesses...by showing other examples of infrastructure (internet) that didn't get built by businesses. Why would he clarify business owners not building their own business by completely changing the topic to infrastructure not getting built on its own?

Intent of the whole passage - The whole intent of the passage was "The point is, when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together."

Why would the major summation of his point be 'we succeed because of our individual initiative' if he meant 'we do not succeed because of our individual intiative' (as you didn't build your own business would imply)?

OK, it still seems tortured to arrive at that "intent", but I'll accept that by "that" he didn't mean "a business", but the infrastructure it depends on. Goodhearted but employing bad writers, I guess.
And everyone already knows that Al created the internet on his own for the good of mankind. :)
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

7c5200d6.jpg
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

Meanwhile, this is hysterical.

But in 2002, during his speech at the Opening Ceremonies at the Winter Olympics -- the games in which Romney was lauded for turning around the management -- Romney made a similar argument about Olympians.

"You Olympians, however, know you didn't get here solely on your own power,” said Romney, who on Friday will attend the Opening Ceremonies of this year’s Summer Olympics. “For most of you, loving parents, sisters or brothers, encouraged your hopes, coaches guided, communities built venues in order to organize competitions. All Olympians stand on the shoulders of those who lifted them. We’ve already cheered the Olympians, let’s also cheer the parents, coaches, and communities. All right! [pumps fist].”
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

So if you combined Olympic Romney with Mass governor Romney, you'd basically have a ... white Obama?

It's a good thing he's no longer that guy, or voters would have no choice at all this fall. :p
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

So if you combined Olympic Romney with Mass governor Romney, you'd basically have a ... white Obama?

It's a good thing he's no longer that guy, or voters would have no choice at all this fall. :p
There's already a white Obama.

His name's Obama. ;)
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

The roads, schools, and the rest of the infrastructure is there for all of us to use. So when we factor out the common denominator, what's left is what? Work ethic? Luck?
Obama
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

There's a big difference between "let's also cheer..." and "you didn't achieve that." One is building up, the other is tearing down.

Boy, that's a reach. To me, the comments are identical: "you did not do this alone." And the veracity of that statement is far more obvious for a business owner than an Olympic athlete.

What's also really obvious is that when Romney made that statement he wasn't in any way criticizing the athletes, just reminding them that there are a lot of people behind every success. Why is that so offensive when it comes to business? Everybody else on the planet recognizes that they have had help getting to where they are -- why do we have to pretend that when it comes to business, the winner is a Nietzschean Übermensch who did it all Himself?
 
Last edited:
Boy, that's a reach. To me, the comments are identical: "you did not do this alone." And the veracity of that statement is far more obvious for a business owner than an Olympic athlete.

Only identical if the next step is to cut any medal won into piece and pass out said pieces to all those others....
 
Re: Elections 2012 -- Kull Wahad!!!

And San Francisco was built on rock and roll.
I'm pretty sure that song is supposed to refer to any city, not just SF. Personally, I always think of Detroit, even though the Bay Area, NYC, and Cleveland are all alluded to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top