In article ,
says...

On 4/4/2013 12:51 PM, J Herring wrote:
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 12:12:33 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 4/4/13 11:52 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 11:28:56 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:


Which has nothing to do with the subject at hand, namely that Gore was
a driving force behind the internet.

LOL! Right...

You really should actually investigate a subject before making stupid
comments. But then again, you are insane and stupid.

Gore certainly WAS a driving force behind the internet. Too bad O'Reilly
won't tell you the truth, moron.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore...ion_technology


Gore was instrumental in passing a law that threw a lot of tax money
at the backbone infrastructure that the telcoms were already building.
You can easily argue that this was the kick start for broadband and
"fast" internet we are now used to,
The open question is how long it would have taken the telcoms without
this infusion of tax money and whether there was some federal help in
getting easements, although most of the fiber followed existing copper
paths.
IBM and Comsat were part of that enterprise and we were hearing about
it in the TP community before the first foot of fiber was laid. At
that time, your best chance for real broadband was leasing space on TV
cable hard line but that was short hops and fairly limited capacity.
The first time I saw that setup was in Dallas where the education
center was on the other side of Rt 124 from the main Dallas office and
there was no easy way to get across that road. The cable company
offered us what would be called a T1 these days a whole lot cheaper
than the RBOC. I am not sure they even had it available in that area
at the time..


No offense intended, but could you fellas find some new topics over
which you can split hairs for a few millions posts? This one is boring,
and, as I age, I get bored more easily.

Thanks...

Part of your audience.

How about sharing some of your 'special circumstances' for carrying with a round in the chamber.
That would be exciting, I'm sure.

And, don't read the posts if you find them boring. Do you really believe your cut'n'pastes are
exciting?


Salmonbait

--
'Name-calling' - the liberals' last stand.


Oh, he's just mad because they aren't talking about him...

And you are an insane, low life fool, so?

On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 07:46:28 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article , says...

On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 20:54:41 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article , says...

"Wayne B" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 10:00:08 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Which has nothing to do with the subject at hand, namely that Gore
was
a driving force behind the internet. Your "experience" has nothing to
do with the underlying reasons for the internet's creation and
nurturing.

===

Why do you feel the need to defend Al Gore? The internet grew out of
ARPANET and TCP/IP which was a little before Al's time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

----------------------------------------------

Didn't the original concept evolve out of DARPA ? I think that
agency was instrumental in funding what became ARPANET.

ARPA preceeds DARPA. There was ARPANET and then there was the Internet.

All correct. Never said Gore had the original concept. He never
claimed to invent the internet. Read up on the actual facts. They're
not hard to find, unless you're reading fox news website.

The actual facts? I was there in the 80's and early 90's working on TCP/IP bridges and
routers and other TCP/IP components.

You're an idiot. Nothing about you being "there" has anything to do
with the discussion.

On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 07:47:18 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article , says...

On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 20:55:11 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article , says...

On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 17:27:26 -0400, Wayne B
wrote:

On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 10:00:08 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Which has nothing to do with the subject at hand, namely that Gore was
a driving force behind the internet. Your "experience" has nothing to
do with the underlying reasons for the internet's creation and
nurturing.

===

Why do you feel the need to defend Al Gore? The internet grew out of
ARPANET and TCP/IP which was a little before Al's time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Not defending anyone. Why do you feel the need to put him down?

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore...ion_technology

Because he is a oppourtunist.

In what respect? Because he's a capitalist? I thought that was the
most important thing in your little existence.

My little existence, that is cute.


Your tiny brain, that's more accurate.

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 11:52:56 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 11:28:56 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:


Which has nothing to do with the subject at hand, namely that Gore was
a driving force behind the internet.

LOL! Right...

You really should actually investigate a subject before making stupid
comments. But then again, you are insane and stupid.

Gore certainly WAS a driving force behind the internet. Too bad O'Reilly
won't tell you the truth, moron.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore...ion_technology


Gore was instrumental in passing a law that threw a lot of tax money
at the backbone infrastructure that the telcoms were already building.
You can easily argue that this was the kick start for broadband and
"fast" internet we are now used to,
The open question is how long it would have taken the telcoms without
this infusion of tax money and whether there was some federal help in
getting easements, although most of the fiber followed existing copper
paths.

Well, gee.. ya think? THe open question... what a load of ****. You
insist that Gore had minimual or nothing to do with it, along with
your ****forbrains buddies, then when faced with the facts, you weasel
by saying, well business could have solved it. THEY DIDN'T.

IBM and Comsat were part of that enterprise and we were hearing about
it in the TP community before the first foot of fiber was laid. At
that time, your best chance for real broadband was leasing space on TV
cable hard line but that was short hops and fairly limited capacity.
The first time I saw that setup was in Dallas where the education
center was on the other side of Rt 124 from the main Dallas office and
there was no easy way to get across that road. The cable company
offered us what would be called a T1 these days a whole lot cheaper
than the RBOC. I am not sure they even had it available in that area
at the time..

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 16:06:39 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 10:55:50 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Gore was instrumental in passing a law that threw a lot of tax money
at the backbone infrastructure that the telcoms were already building.
You can easily argue that this was the kick start for broadband and
"fast" internet we are now used to,
The open question is how long it would have taken the telcoms without
this infusion of tax money and whether there was some federal help in
getting easements, although most of the fiber followed existing copper
paths.

Well, gee.. ya think? THe open question... what a load of ****.

I suppose that is true if you think nothing ever happens in this
country without massive amounts of government corporate welfare.


Some things happen, some don't. In your brain, government is bad, so I
guess you don't mind the superhighways and only drive on surface
streets. Oh yeah, they're funded by the government in part also.

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:35:46 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 13:40:53 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 16:06:39 -0400, wrote:


I suppose that is true if you think nothing ever happens in this
country without massive amounts of government corporate welfare.


Some things happen, some don't. In your brain, government is bad, so I
guess you don't mind the superhighways and only drive on surface
streets. Oh yeah, they're funded by the government in part also.

Highways are funded by taxes on that evil gasoline you keep railing on
about. That is a case where oil subsidizes government.
I wonder how we would fund roads if everyone had a plug in car?

Oil isn't the thing subsidizing government. Our taxes are subsidizing
the building of roads and subsidizing oil companies that don't need
extra money.

Yes, you wonder... perhaps you haven't thought about it for more than
30 seconds.

"Urin Asshole" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 16:06:39 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 10:55:50 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Gore was instrumental in passing a law that threw a lot of tax
money
at the backbone infrastructure that the telcoms were already
building.
You can easily argue that this was the kick start for broadband and
"fast" internet we are now used to,
The open question is how long it would have taken the telcoms
without
this infusion of tax money and whether there was some federal help
in
getting easements, although most of the fiber followed existing
copper
paths.

Well, gee.. ya think? THe open question... what a load of ****.

I suppose that is true if you think nothing ever happens in this
country without massive amounts of government corporate welfare.


Some things happen, some don't. In your brain, government is bad, so I
guess you don't mind the superhighways and only drive on surface
streets. Oh yeah, they're funded by the government in part also.

----------------------------------

And the government is funded by ........?

On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 19:29:03 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"Urin Asshole" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 16:06:39 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 10:55:50 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Gore was instrumental in passing a law that threw a lot of tax
money
at the backbone infrastructure that the telcoms were already
building.
You can easily argue that this was the kick start for broadband and
"fast" internet we are now used to,
The open question is how long it would have taken the telcoms
without
this infusion of tax money and whether there was some federal help
in
getting easements, although most of the fiber followed existing
copper
paths.

Well, gee.. ya think? THe open question... what a load of ****.

I suppose that is true if you think nothing ever happens in this
country without massive amounts of government corporate welfare.


Some things happen, some don't. In your brain, government is bad, so I
guess you don't mind the superhighways and only drive on surface
streets. Oh yeah, they're funded by the government in part also.

----------------------------------

And the government is funded by ........?

The people of course. According to the right, the government is evil
and should be drowned in a tub? So, assuming you're not insane, what's
your point with the comment?

"Urin Asshole" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 19:29:03 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


Some things happen, some don't. In your brain, government is bad, so
I
guess you don't mind the superhighways and only drive on surface
streets. Oh yeah, they're funded by the government in part also.

----------------------------------

And the government is funded by ........?

The people of course. According to the right, the government is evil
and should be drowned in a tub? So, assuming you're not insane, what's
your point with the comment?

---------------------------------------------------

Not insane that I know of. But I have a feeling that if I hang
around here much longer, I'll be well on my way.
Carry on.

On Apr 4, 7:46*pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Urin Asshole" *wrote in message

...

On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 19:29:03 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Some things happen, some don't. In your brain, government is bad, so
I
guess you don't mind the superhighways and only drive on surface
streets. Oh yeah, they're funded by the government in part also.

----------------------------------

And the government is funded by ........?

The people of course. According to the right, the government is evil
and should be drowned in a tub? So, assuming you're not insane, what's
your point with the comment?

---------------------------------------------------

Not insane that I know of. * But I have a feeling that if I hang
around here much longer, I'll be well on my way.
Carry on.

Rich, that's why I only show up sporadically anymore.