Would the Internet have become a reality had the U.S. government, or any other government, not allotted millions of dollars to its development and construction?  Why or why not?
138339
Probably so, but it would have taken a lot longer.  It's a technology that many people use and is definitely a large revenue source for many companies.  It might have taken a slightly different form or shape than it is today, but the ease of global communication is really something that many companies would have invested the R&D for once they realized something like that was possible.
285957
This is what he actually said during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN's "Late Edition" program on 9 March 1999: \n\n"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system."\n\nYou can decide for yourself whether he was actually claiming to have invented the Internet, or was he just being his usual pompous self (or both?)
158191
The answer to it would be probably NO! But still, there are a few catches in it. In a few geographic locations there are ways to get connected to net for free.\n\nGoogle is going to going to provide free wireless access to internet in US (only one city for startups) very soon. There are many hotels and many places in the world, which provide free WiFi access (called HOTSPOTS).\n\nThere are many ISPs which provide free internet access for free as trial versions.\n\nBut, in 99.99% of the cases there exists no such facility as of now. It may be possible in some part of the world.
102593
with tech, everyone has a voice. theres no need for representitives anymore. theres nothing gov doe that the private sector cant do better. theres no need for government at all anymore. obviously government cant; protect the borders, deliver the mail, protect its people, build roads, secure trade & commerce, develop relations with other countries.....nothing.
250403
I doubt it.    A very good read is James A. Micheners' "Alaska"\n\nThe parallel is this..  business interests do not want the regulation that would necessarily come with statehood.. State regulations, adherence to Federal regulations.. the list is very long.  In the case of Alaska, people and natural resources were exploited heavily. \n\n I think PR may be in the same scenario
194820
That could be interesting. Imagine if you could set up citizenship-timeshare mechanisms over the web to provide a fast supply and demand type of mechanism that would allow for the fast use of citizenships to supply the needed workforce for evry country in the world ...
156507
It is expensive.  The cost creates a technical divide.  The poor do not have equel access to the new tech (think about computers and the internet in the 90's).
313630
owned by the people: yes\n\nControlled by the government: no
67987
That is a good story.\n\nBut, one reason for Government is to provide goods and services that can be a "collective action problem" or "free rider problem".  In a society, there will always be examples of the entire public good being improved by small contributions from every resident, while the entire populace would be greatly disserved by ignoring those contributions.\n\nA good example is the interstate system, (Thanks Eisenhower!) or the National Defense. A small contribution (i.e taxes) from each individual can add up to insure that goods and services can travel around the country, and that we don't get invaded.  \n\nIn current terms, we have two choices. A) give relief in the form of monetary aid to Hurricane Katrina victims on the gulf coast, with each citizen making a relatively small sacrifice in the form of taxes or B) choose not to give that aid, and watch tens of thousands of people suffer, through death , illness, bankruptcy, etc.\n\nI think most people believe we have an obligation to provide relief to some, but we all seem to draw a different line in the sand about what constitutes a "small contribution". \nFor example, it's expected that an additional $120 billion will be allocated to the Mideast war(s). That's about 350-400 dollars per American citizen. Is this a small contribution?\n\nEvery person draws their line differently.
157706
Yes it's half true, but it isn't your computer, mine and Joe Bloggs, it's very large servers and data centre arrays that are 'logged on' that the Internet content is stored on. If they were switched off then yes, your friend is correct, the Internet would cease to exist. \n....................Added to above (Robin and Ma...)if all the Computers in the world were turned off the info would not "cease to exit" it would not be accessable until they were switched back on.
395305
that would be very expensive, even if you could. \n\njust use the internet.
112825
Nope.  The government rewards misuse of taxpayer funding by sending more money.  Agencies which use thier money wisely and opperate within budget typically are rewarded by having thier budgets cut.  That's typical thinking in government.
446688
I think it would be a FINE idea... have seen it at work in other countries such as Switzerland and The Netherlands.\n\nThe trouble in the USA is rather simple... business (Contractors) wouldn't permit it.  Imagine all that (relatively) cheap labor in the hands of the government !!  Building our infrastructure: roads, bridges, cleaning our parks, etc... they'd all be on a pay-structure that would drive the UNIONS that get those government contracts batty !!\n\nBut also... THINK of the money the tax-payers could SAVE !!  Projects done for half (or less) of the cost we pay today.  We'd have virtually ZERO unemployment in the 18-21 yr range, and they would gather useful training during that period that might just reduce unemployment further down the road.\n\nApply some rules not unlike the military regarding behavior, fiscal responsibility, and pride.\n\nYes, I like the idea.
602072
Don't you wish that money could be used for those AMERICANS that really need it?
258089
In the mid 90s, when the internet became a common household electronic, many start up businesses tried to capitalize on the mass market audience. Millions of dollars were poured into start up internet companies. Yet since the technology was new to the general public, and some were wary about shopping on line with credit cards, many of those start ups went bust. The internet boom fizzled in 2000. Since then it has gained momentum again.\n\nAlso one problem with the internet during the 90s was slow modems. AOL was the number one internet provider. And there modem was very slow, 56K. That's a snail's pace. When cable and telephone companies started to enter the market, they brought along fiber optic cables, which is 100 times faster than the 56K modem. This pleased the mass market and the internet started to grow again.
612386
It's annoying is what it is.  The removal of net Neutrality would be entirely too hard to handle, the corruption involved could completely topple the fundamental idea of the Internet, the free exchange of information.  It's just the classic example of people who have a lot of money wanting more money from people they think have a lot more money.
317461
Of course, and taxes are too low right now. We dont have enough resources to pay for everything...\n\nI would fund the federal government the most because disasters dont understand borders