[info at fsf.org: He invented the Web. Would he give up on free standards?]

Razer rayzer at riseup.net
Fri Nov 11 18:33:47 PST 2016


Last word on the subject putz.

Obtuse means you approached a topic at some odd angle that others might
not immediately comprehend. Saying it means 'somehow slow' does the full
meaning an injustice. Obtuseness can be a good thing. "Thinking outside
the box" can be 'obtuse' thinking.

Illiterate schmuck. Stick to web definitions and stay illiterate.

Rr


On 11/11/2016 12:24 PM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
> On 11/11/16 12:16 PM, Razer wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/11/2016 12:08 PM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>>> On 11/11/16 12:05 PM, Razer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/11/2016 11:12 AM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>>>>> Specific and well-known historical record is obtuse?  I don't
>>>>> think you know what that word means.
>>>>>
>>>>> sdw
>>>>
>>>> Yes I do. It means tangential... surrounded by blather...
>>>>
>>>> Go look it up. You bury grams of information in pounds of trash talk.
>>>
>>> No, it doesn't:
>>> http://www.dictionary.com/browse/obtuse
>>>
>>>> adjective
>>>>
>>>> 1.
>>>> not quick or alert in perception, feeling, or intellect; not
>>>> sensitive or observant; dull.
>>>
>>> sdw
>>>
>>
>>
>> Obtuse in a KIND OF ANGLE, STUPID.
>
> Thanks for emphatically clarifying that you didn't know the relevant
> meaning.  I would offer to use small words next time, but it is
> already a small word.  Btw, even as a math term, it is used "adjectively".
>
> sdw
>
>>
>> No wonder you don't make any sense most of the time an our eys all
>> glaze over when you post. Your idiocy in using it adjectively,
>> despite the fact that almost NO ONE uses it that way, to fend of
>> criticism of your blather, IS A PRIME EXAMPLE of your Obtuseness,
>> adjectively.
>
>>
>> Rr
>>
>>>>
>>>> Rr
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/11/16 10:54 AM, Razer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dude! You EXEMPLIFY "Obtuse".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/11/2016 10:30 AM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/11/16 10:19 AM, Razer wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 11/11/2016 09:33 AM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Did a Torvalds"?  Are you now saying that Linus didn't
>>>>>>>>> contribute anything significant either?  Oh my.  You are so
>>>>>>>>> clueless.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I said or implied nothing of the sort. The implication is he
>>>>>>>> took code he owned and open-sourced it. I think that's pretty
>>>>>>>> fucking obvious troll.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You said:
>>>>>>>> This is exactly what I mean... CERF DID NOT DEVELOP TCPIP
>>>>>>>> ALONE, hence all sorts of offshoots like TP-K inos, jnos etc
>>>>>>>> b/c a ham radio operator who was on the tcipip dev team 'did a
>>>>>>>> Torvalds'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I interpreted that as:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CERF DID NOT DEVELOP TCPIP ALONE ... [some implied connection] a
>>>>>>> ham radio operator who was on the tcipip dev team 'did a Torvalds'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I couldn't tell if you were referring to later implementations
>>>>>>> and use of things like KA9Q as somehow affecting the fact that
>>>>>>> he designed the protocol a decade or more earlier, or if you
>>>>>>> were saying that he was a ham radio operator on some team who
>>>>>>> took all the credit for a team effort as Linus (quite fairly)
>>>>>>> has.  Since none of it seems very logical, and the former is
>>>>>>> ridiculous, I took my best guess at meaning.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Misunderstanding your poor communication is not trolling.  Being
>>>>>>> obtuse then calling misunderstandings trolling is trolling.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rr
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sdw
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> VC never said he developed TCP/IP alone, which is why I said
>>>>>>>>> co-invented.  Of course there were previous tries at solving
>>>>>>>>> networking problems that were learned from, but they were
>>>>>>>>> flawed and we no longer use any of them.  Similarly, every
>>>>>>>>> patent depends on the existence of prior ideas, but is
>>>>>>>>> recognized as being a significant leap forward.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vint_Cerf
>>>>>>>>>> After receiving his doctorate, Cerf became an assistant
>>>>>>>>>> professor
>>>>>>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professor#Assistant_professor>
>>>>>>>>>> at Stanford University from 1972–1976, where he conducted
>>>>>>>>>> research on packet network interconnection protocols and
>>>>>>>>>> co-designed the DoD TCP/IP protocol suite with Kahn.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> TCP/IP solved, to a large extent, every core network protocol
>>>>>>>>> problem that needed to be solved to build a working Internet. 
>>>>>>>>> It is amazing that very few changes were made since the first
>>>>>>>>> released version.  We all know what we mean by "Vint Cerf
>>>>>>>>> invented the Internet."  We know there was more to it, but
>>>>>>>>> what he did enabled everything else with an elegant solution.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Did a Torvalds"?  Are you now saying that Linus didn't
>>>>>>>>> contribute anything significant either?  Oh my.  You are so
>>>>>>>>> clueless.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You're ideology is strange and not very useful.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We all wish we could have contributed as centrally to the
>>>>>>>>> Internet and related advances.  But that doesn't mean we don't
>>>>>>>>> value and appreciate those who did.  It could have been much
>>>>>>>>> worse in many ways.  We could be paying packet charges to
>>>>>>>>> national telecoms with only centralized "security", for
>>>>>>>>> instance.  We are very very lucky, and not in an anthropic
>>>>>>>>> principle way.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> sdw
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 11/11/16 9:00 AM, Razer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is exactly what I mean... CERF DID NOT DEVELOP TCPIP
>>>>>>>>>> ALONE, hence all sorts of offshoots like TP-K inos, jnos etc
>>>>>>>>>> b/c a ham radio operator who was on the tcipip dev team 'did
>>>>>>>>>> a Torvalds'.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's like saying Wozniak and Gates developed personal
>>>>>>>>>> computers. It's literally idiotic and historically vacant. A
>>>>>>>>>> stupid-ing down of the history of the internet.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/10/2016 09:03 PM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/10/16 7:39 PM, Razer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/10/2016 03:14 PM, Mr Harkness quoted some schmuck:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Twenty-five years ago, Berners-Lee invented the World Wide Web.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I've seen this claim about a number of different people and
>>>>>>>>>>>> you know? It's about as ignorant a thing to say as I can
>>>>>>>>>>>> imagine. One person inventing the WWW... ROTF!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> MAYBE the TERM "WWW".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Rr
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There are a number of well-known cases of specific
>>>>>>>>>>> individuals inventing or co-inventing specific components of
>>>>>>>>>>> the Internet and protocols on it.  TBL invented the World
>>>>>>>>>>> Wide Web in a core and well-known specific sense.  Most of
>>>>>>>>>>> us have read all about it and a few of us were experiencing
>>>>>>>>>>> it real-time, switching from FTP, telnet, and Archie to
>>>>>>>>>>> Mosaic w/ web pages.  Vint Cerf co-invented TCP/IP, commonly
>>>>>>>>>>> summarized as "invented the Internet".  I don't know of
>>>>>>>>>>> anyone else who is said to have "invented the World Wide
>>>>>>>>>>> Web".  There were people who earlier suggested some kind of
>>>>>>>>>>> linked shared information, like Ted Nelson.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://webfoundation.org/about/vision/history-of-the-web/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> sdw
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
> sdw
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 18433 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20161111/0f78e1e6/attachment.txt>


More information about the cypherpunks mailing list