Dear Noah:
0) "Iterations often times leads back to the beginning.": Thanks for
distilling this thread to a concise principle. Perhaps your name was
given with the foresight of this discussion? ????
1) As a newcomer to the arena, I have always been perplexed by the
apparent collective NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome of the Internet
community. While promoting openness, everything seems to go with "my way
or noway". Of course, each Internet practice or convention was
determined by some sort of consensus by majority opinion. However, once
it gets going, it appears to be cast in concrete. There is a huge
inertia against considering alternatives or improvements. Some of them
even appear to be volunteered "policing" without full understanding of
the background. Just like how practically all democratic governments are
facing these days, a well-intended crowd can be led by an influencer to
derail a social normality. It does not seem to me that strictly adhering
to "one person one vote" rule can guide us toward a productive future.
2) To follow what you are saying, I wonder how could we think "out of
the box" or go "back to the future", before it is too late for our world
wide communications infrastructure to serve as a reliable daily tool
without being a distraction constantly? That is, four decades should be
long enough for our Internet experiments to be reviewed, so that we can
try navigating out of the current chaos, or start with an alternative.
Regards,
Abe (2022-10-30 18:41 EDT)
On 2022-10-30 12:47, Noah wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, 00:18 Randy Bush, <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>
> my favorite is
>
> It's perfectly appropriate to be upset.
>
>
> Ack....
>
> I thought of it in a slightly
> different way--like a space that we were exploring and, in the
> early days,
> we figured out this consistent path through the space: IP, TCP,
> and so on.
>
>
> the impact of IP, TCP in improving human life across the globe in the
> last decades can not be overstated.
>
> Human enginuity through names like Google have enabled the age of
> information and access to information through addresses and digital
> trade routes have continued to ensure peace for humanity on the
> positive side of the communications spectrum.
>
> What's been happening over the last few years is that the IETF is
> filling
> the rest of the space with every alternative approach, not
> necessarily any
> better. Every possible alternative is now being written down.
> And it's not
> useful. -- Jon Postel
>
>
> I suppose original human ideas and thoughts tends to stand the taste
> of time.
>
> Iterations often times leads back to the beginning.
>
> Noah
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
0) "Iterations often times leads back to the beginning.": Thanks for
distilling this thread to a concise principle. Perhaps your name was
given with the foresight of this discussion? ????
1) As a newcomer to the arena, I have always been perplexed by the
apparent collective NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome of the Internet
community. While promoting openness, everything seems to go with "my way
or noway". Of course, each Internet practice or convention was
determined by some sort of consensus by majority opinion. However, once
it gets going, it appears to be cast in concrete. There is a huge
inertia against considering alternatives or improvements. Some of them
even appear to be volunteered "policing" without full understanding of
the background. Just like how practically all democratic governments are
facing these days, a well-intended crowd can be led by an influencer to
derail a social normality. It does not seem to me that strictly adhering
to "one person one vote" rule can guide us toward a productive future.
2) To follow what you are saying, I wonder how could we think "out of
the box" or go "back to the future", before it is too late for our world
wide communications infrastructure to serve as a reliable daily tool
without being a distraction constantly? That is, four decades should be
long enough for our Internet experiments to be reviewed, so that we can
try navigating out of the current chaos, or start with an alternative.
Regards,
Abe (2022-10-30 18:41 EDT)
On 2022-10-30 12:47, Noah wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2022, 00:18 Randy Bush, <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>
> my favorite is
>
> It's perfectly appropriate to be upset.
>
>
> Ack....
>
> I thought of it in a slightly
> different way--like a space that we were exploring and, in the
> early days,
> we figured out this consistent path through the space: IP, TCP,
> and so on.
>
>
> the impact of IP, TCP in improving human life across the globe in the
> last decades can not be overstated.
>
> Human enginuity through names like Google have enabled the age of
> information and access to information through addresses and digital
> trade routes have continued to ensure peace for humanity on the
> positive side of the communications spectrum.
>
> What's been happening over the last few years is that the IETF is
> filling
> the rest of the space with every alternative approach, not
> necessarily any
> better. Every possible alternative is now being written down.
> And it's not
> useful. -- Jon Postel
>
>
> I suppose original human ideas and thoughts tends to stand the taste
> of time.
>
> Iterations often times leads back to the beginning.
>
> Noah
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com