Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development.
...
Last year the Vice President made a straightforward statement on his role. He said: “During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”
...
He was the first elected official to grasp the potential of computer communications to have a broader impact than just improving the conduct of science and scholarship.
...
Congressman Gore provided intellectual leadership by helping create the vision of the potential benefits of high speed computing and communication. As an example, he sponsored hearings on how advanced technologies might be put to use in areas like coordinating the response of government agencies to natural disasters and other crises.
First of all, this article is a response to the backlash Gore received from saying, "I took the initiative in creating the Internet." In other words, it is inherently biased.
Secondly, the article is full of warm fuzzy language that doesn't mean shit: "He was the first elected official to grasp the potential of computer communications" "Congressman Gore provided intellectual leadership by helping create the vision of the potential benefits of high speed computing and communication."
Gore is the an opportunistic slime ball. The scum of the earth. He happened to support a bill for "supercomputing" and now he and his proponents are claiming he is the "visionary" for creating the internet. Total BS. Correlation is not causation.
And if you want to know just how wrong his vision is, he envisioned the high speed telecommunications being used for government responses to natural disasters. Well that's funny because we've had plenty of disasters where the U.S. government wasn't able to respond, despite the ubiquitous deployment of the Internet. (e.g., Hurricane Katrina)
Thanks for posting this. I don't understand all the "hate" for Gore. A very decent man with some intellect, more than can be said for the vast majority of our other politicians.
But even the Kahn/Cerf document you posted won't change the minds of most people here. They have a story in their heads and then shape the facts to meet the demands of that story.
For many people their desire to propagandize will always override facts. But, I have posted this letter several times in the last year. I'm seeing references to it now. Some people do learn, whereas before, there were none but mine.
There's progress -- too rare and not enough -- but it is occurring.
Thanks for posting this. I don't understand all the "hate" for Gore. A very decent man with some intellect, more than can be said for the vast majority of our other politicians.
But even the Kahn/Cerf document you posted won't change the minds of most people here. They have a story in their heads and then shape the facts to meet the demands of that story.
The "some intellect" is the key. He actually handles ideas very well. This invites hatred from the ignorant and the insecure. People who think cavemen played with dinosaur babies in wheelbarrows because they saw it on TV.
[" url="/t/181246/tim-cook-reportedly-seeking-new-blood-for-apples-board-of-directors#post_2560551"]
How often does the board have to meet? How many hours per year do the board members put in on average? How much of an input does the board really have?
At least four times a year, in companies like Apple. The average Fortune 500 board member spends about one month worth of company-related work. Post-SOx, boards have a major say in what goes on in companies.
I hope they each pay $500,000 for their coffee with Tim.
Algorithms were named after him for a reason. Duh¡
He believes he invented the internet.
He thinks Cacti are waving at him when he drives his Prius through the desert.
He has never been Googled.
He's, the least interesting man in the world.
The internet took off after it was privatized. You have to look at intent. A slow, lumbering, inefficient govt. program vs. the free market, hell bent on making a profit.
Going back to the beginning is interesting but doesn't tell the whole story. It's only part of the story. If taken to extreme, one could say caveman was responsible for Mercedes, having invented the wheel. Or Moses had the idea of tablets and thus should be credited with inventing the iPad.
Ugh..meant to add that the same goes for Xerox PARC. There's a book out there but I forgot the title. It shows just how primitive the interface they developed was. I have no problem with giving Jobs the credit for revolutionizing the GUI. He had the vision and drive and took a little nugget from Xerox and turned it into the Macintosh.
Wheel: Indo-Europeans, Central Asian steppe, c. 5000 BC. They were also first to tame and ride horses, giving the wheel something to do.
Tablet: Sumer, Mesopotamia, c. 4000 BC, about 2500 years before Moses.
Ok, you were making a bad joke, but you started out wrong by trying to take away credit from where it was due. When your government does something right, it should be acknowledged.
Psh. The Sumer tablet is to The Ten Commandments as the Microsoft Tablet PC is to the iPad.
30,000 x 96 = $2.88 million but as you are quoting the 1997 agreement, surely that should equate to 7 x 30,000 x $96 = $20.16 million? Even if you add another 10,000 or 7 x 10,000 shares, I still can't reach your $6m number... am I missing something? What are your workings on this?
It was a rough estimate 10,000 x $600/shr. I was just trying to emphasize the huge compensation these board members get for only a months worth of work and then not promoting the product they represent.
It was a rough estimate 10,000 x $600/shr. I was just trying to emphasize the huge compensation these board members get for only a months worth of work and then not promoting the product they represent.
OK, I used the most up to date on my app, but then I work in Finance so I'm a bit picky on details! :-)
To be fair, it isn't the physical work each person does individually that is important on a board, but the connections and influence these people bring - as well as in some cases technical stuff when two companies are forming a partnership to work together as Google and Apple did before Google ripped up the agreement. Politicians don't get to the pinnacle of their craft without a huge base of support from very important people and it is this support base that Apple must have wanted to buy into.
Compare this with sportspeople, who get paid millions to play just one or two games a week for half the year, and earn even more from sponsorships. All they bring is their image, do a photoshoot once or twice a year, and earn $10m or more for it. Now, you might say they have to train every day and all year, but those Directors with connections have to keep those connections sweet every single day as well. They both do vital behind the scenes work you don't see.
I agree with you that the generally high salaries in the corporate world are an increasingly big problem, and the split between the 1% and the rest of us is accelerating and distorting economies. It's not even good economics, and at some point the stresses and strains on the system will cause a break somewhere.
For me, the problem isn't so much the higher top end salaries, it's the lower end salaries that are hardly moving, as it is the spending power of the 99% that keeps an economy growing; most of the money accumulating to the 1% doesn't get used, it just sits there mostly being unproductive. That is not healthy economics and has the same stifling effect as higher interest rates, higher taxes, or higher debts - even higher savings, unless used for investment in new ideas. Anything that removes money from the economy is a drain on growth. When growth is low, removing money from the economy causes, worsens, or extends a recession. That's why Keynesian economists say debt should not be repaid in a recession or slump, but in a boom; the trouble is in a boom greedy people insist on tax cuts before paying back debt; if they were patient, the debt repayment could allow saved future debt interest to go into tax cuts without affecting government spending, and as the economy was growing and could then grow faster, both government spending as a proportion of GDP and national debt as a proportion of GDP would fall, just like the size of your mortgage as a percentage of value falls as house prices rise.
Comments
To answer your Gore diatribe:
Al Gore and the Internet
By Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf
Dated: 28 Sep 2000
Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its development.
...
Last year the Vice President made a straightforward statement on his role. He said: “During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”
...
He was the first elected official to grasp the potential of computer communications to have a broader impact than just improving the conduct of science and scholarship.
...
Congressman Gore provided intellectual leadership by helping create the vision of the potential benefits of high speed computing and communication. As an example, he sponsored hearings on how advanced technologies might be put to use in areas like coordinating the response of government agencies to natural disasters and other crises.
First of all, this article is a response to the backlash Gore received from saying, "I took the initiative in creating the Internet." In other words, it is inherently biased.
Secondly, the article is full of warm fuzzy language that doesn't mean shit: "He was the first elected official to grasp the potential of computer communications" "Congressman Gore provided intellectual leadership by helping create the vision of the potential benefits of high speed computing and communication."
Gore is the an opportunistic slime ball. The scum of the earth. He happened to support a bill for "supercomputing" and now he and his proponents are claiming he is the "visionary" for creating the internet. Total BS. Correlation is not causation.
And if you want to know just how wrong his vision is, he envisioned the high speed telecommunications being used for government responses to natural disasters. Well that's funny because we've had plenty of disasters where the U.S. government wasn't able to respond, despite the ubiquitous deployment of the Internet. (e.g., Hurricane Katrina)
I've been called disgraceful for not giving credit but someone beat me to it:
Whatever Al's genius, he seems to have flatlined since joining Apple's board.
I'm encouraged by the news that Tim is seeking new blood. Let's hope it doesn't include the revolutionary Joe Biden.
For many people their desire to propagandize will always override facts. But, I have posted this letter several times in the last year. I'm seeing references to it now. Some people do learn, whereas before, there were none but mine.
There's progress -- too rare and not enough -- but it is occurring.
The "some intellect" is the key. He actually handles ideas very well. This invites hatred from the ignorant and the insecure. People who think cavemen played with dinosaur babies in wheelbarrows because they saw it on TV.
Good stuff. You're the first applicant.
I hope they each pay $500,000 for their coffee with Tim.
Gore the Bore, eh? Al be having none of it.
Psh. The Sumer tablet is to The Ten Commandments as the Microsoft Tablet PC is to the iPad.
It was a rough estimate 10,000 x $600/shr. I was just trying to emphasize the huge compensation these board members get for only a months worth of work and then not promoting the product they represent.
It was a rough estimate 10,000 x $600/shr. I was just trying to emphasize the huge compensation these board members get for only a months worth of work and then not promoting the product they represent.
OK, I used the most up to date on my app, but then I work in Finance so I'm a bit picky on details! :-)
To be fair, it isn't the physical work each person does individually that is important on a board, but the connections and influence these people bring - as well as in some cases technical stuff when two companies are forming a partnership to work together as Google and Apple did before Google ripped up the agreement. Politicians don't get to the pinnacle of their craft without a huge base of support from very important people and it is this support base that Apple must have wanted to buy into.
Compare this with sportspeople, who get paid millions to play just one or two games a week for half the year, and earn even more from sponsorships. All they bring is their image, do a photoshoot once or twice a year, and earn $10m or more for it. Now, you might say they have to train every day and all year, but those Directors with connections have to keep those connections sweet every single day as well. They both do vital behind the scenes work you don't see.
I agree with you that the generally high salaries in the corporate world are an increasingly big problem, and the split between the 1% and the rest of us is accelerating and distorting economies. It's not even good economics, and at some point the stresses and strains on the system will cause a break somewhere.
For me, the problem isn't so much the higher top end salaries, it's the lower end salaries that are hardly moving, as it is the spending power of the 99% that keeps an economy growing; most of the money accumulating to the 1% doesn't get used, it just sits there mostly being unproductive. That is not healthy economics and has the same stifling effect as higher interest rates, higher taxes, or higher debts - even higher savings, unless used for investment in new ideas. Anything that removes money from the economy is a drain on growth. When growth is low, removing money from the economy causes, worsens, or extends a recession. That's why Keynesian economists say debt should not be repaid in a recession or slump, but in a boom; the trouble is in a boom greedy people insist on tax cuts before paying back debt; if they were patient, the debt repayment could allow saved future debt interest to go into tax cuts without affecting government spending, and as the economy was growing and could then grow faster, both government spending as a proportion of GDP and national debt as a proportion of GDP would fall, just like the size of your mortgage as a percentage of value falls as house prices rise.
:-)