Paul Baran and the Origins of the Internet | RAND

This is part of a series dedicated to what we regard as “First Principles.” No set of principles, in our view, is more important than the notion that distributed networks are more robust than centralized networks, and that this applies to a military command-and-control network no more or less than it applies to a suburban neighborhood, rural community, or a city – any social network. Thanks to the RAND Corporation, much of the most important early work in network theory, written by the late Paul Baran, is readily available online for free. Math-averse readers should have no worries, Baran (and the uncredited authors at RAND) won’t require you to have any arithmetic, much less mathematical, background. Before you read the following excerpt introducing the RAND series, we’d like readers to think of themselves, their neighbors, and family and friends both near and far as members of, or “nodes” on, a social network.

In 1962, a nuclear confrontation seemed imminent. The United States (US) and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) were embroiled in the Cuban missile crisis. Both the US and the USSR were in the process of building hair-trigger nuclear ballistic missile systems. Each country pondered post-nuclear attack scenarios.

 

Centralized Network

 

US authorities considered ways to communicate in the aftermath of a nuclear attack. How could any sort of “command and control network” survive? Paul Baran, a researcher at RAND, offered a solution: design a more robust communications network using “redundancy” and “digital” technology.

At the time, naysayers dismissed Baran’s idea as unfeasible. But working with colleagues at RAND, Baran persisted. This effort would eventually become the foundation for the World Wide Web.

centralized switching facilities

centralized

distributed switching facilities

distributed

Baran was born in Poland in 1926. In 1928, his family moved to the US. He attended Drexel University where he earned a degree in electrical engineering. Afterward, Baran married and moved to Los Angeles where he worked for the Hughes Aircraft Company. Taking night classes at UCLA, he earned an engineering master’s degree in 1959–the same year he joined RAND.

At that time, RAND focused mostly on Cold War-related military issues. A looming concern was that neither the long-distance telephone plant, nor the basic military command and control network would survive a nuclear attack. Although most of the links would be undamaged, the centralized switching facilities would be destroyed by enemy weapons. Consequently, Baran conceived a system that had no centralized switches and could operate even if many of its links and switching nodes had been destroyed.

Baran envisioned a network of unmanned nodes that would act as switches, routing information from one node to another to their final destinations. The nodes would use a scheme Baran called “hot-potato routing” or distributed communications.

Baran also developed the concept of dividing information into “message blocks” before sending them out across the network. Each block would be sent separately and rejoined into a whole when they were received at their destination. A British man named Donald Davies independently devised a very similar system, but he called the message blocks “packets,” a term that was eventually adopted instead of Baran’s message blocks.

 

Distributed Network

 

This method of “packet switching” is a rapid store-and-forward design. When a node receives a packet it stores it, determines the best route to its destination, and sends it to the next node on that path. If there was a problem with a node (or if it had been destroyed) packets would simply be routed around it.

In a recent interview with Wired magazine, Baran discussed his vision of how the new technology might be used. “Around December 1966, I presented a paper at the American Marketing Association called ‘Marketing in the Year 2000.’ I described push-and-pull communications and how we’re going to do our shopping via a television set and a virtual department store. If you want to buy a drill, you click on Hardware and that shows Tools and you click on that and go deeper.”

In 1969, this “distributed” concept was given its first large-scale test, with the first node installed at UCLA and the seventh node at RAND in Santa Monica. Funded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency and called ARPANET, it was intended for scientists and researchers who wanted to share one another’s computers remotely. Within two years, however, the network’s users had turned it into something unforeseen: a high-speed, electronic post office for exchanging everything from technical to personal information.

In 1983, the rapidly expanding network broke off from its military part, which became MILNET. The remainder became what was called ARPANET. In 1989, the ARPANET moniker was retired in favor the “Internet,” which had also been described as the “information superhighway.” These days, the Internet continues to expand, stringing together the World Wide Web, an all-encompassing, affordable, universal multimedia communications network (see related RAND Review article).

Today, RAND continues to conduct research in this area. CEO and President of RAND Jim Thomson recently recalled Baran’s contributions. “Our world is a better place for the technologies Paul Baran has invented and developed, and also because of his consistent concern with appropriate public policies for their use.”

via Paul Baran and the Origins of the Internet | RAND.

Progressive Tax Policy

Taxes are the price we pay for civilization.” – Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Progressive tax structures are not about punishing the rich. They are a recognition that wealthy people derive benefits from being in society. Warren Buffett, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Michael Jordan, Oprah, for example, got rich because people buy their products or watched them play basketball or on TV.  Paris Hilton is wealthy because her great-grandfather built a successful business. Their successes are wonderful. But their success should not require me to subsidize their lifestyles.

This tax structure can be implemented by October 31, 2012, and effective January 1, 2013, if not by Congress, then by Executive Order.

| Follow LJF97 on Twitter / Tweet  / Zuccotti  / mp3 | Continue reading

BBC News – Global warming 'confirmed' by independent study

Richard Black, Environment correspondent for the BBC News, reports that – no shocker here –  global warming does, in fact,  seem to be occurring.

The Earth’s surface really is getting warmer, a new analysis by a US scientific group set up in the wake of the “Climategate” affair has concluded.The Berkeley Earth Project has used new methods and some new data, but finds the same warming trend seen by groups such as the UK Met Office and Nasa.The project received funds from sources that back organisations lobbying against action on climate change.”Climategate”, in 2009, involved claims global warming had been exaggerated.Emails of University of East Anglia UEA climate scientists were hacked, posted online and used by critics to allege manipulation of climate change

via BBC News – Global warming ‘confirmed’ by independent study.

Occupy Wall Street – Why are They There?

_Follow LJF97 on Twitter Tweet  Sometimes the “Invisible Hand” shoots itself in its “Invisible Foot.”

I’m here and most of us are here because we see dramatic inequities in the system.  We play by the rules.  The banksters are playing Three Card Monte and we are captive players – marks – in the game. They’ve marked the cards and stacked the deck. Bank of America, for example, took $45 Billion in TARP money and then started charging $5.00 dollars a month to depositors who hold a debit card. The bank borrows money for which it pays next to nothing. The bank charges usurious fees to customers who borrow money using credit cards, and it charges depositors absurd fees to access their funds on deposit in the bank.

This is one issue. Other issues include taxes, access to health care, education, jobs, and energy. All have to do with our nature as economic actors within the larger communities of the nation and the world. The question we are trying to answer, with a resounding “YES!” is “Should we live in an economic democracy?”

Continue reading

Dennis Ritchie, 1941 – 2011

Dennis Ritchie,  co-inventor, with Brian W. Kernighan, of the C programming language, and co-author of the book of that name, and co-inventor, with Ken Thompson, of  the Unix operating system, died at his home in Berkeley Heights, NJ. He was 70.

He spent his professional career at Bell Labs, an iconic institution which boasted a patent a day for years, if not decades, and includes among its inventions both the transistor and the photovoltaic cell.

Like Steve Jobs, Dennis Ritchie was an iconic pioneer who changed the world significantly and dramatically. And like Steve Jobs, Dennis Ritchie’s work influences modern computers, from the servers in network operations centers to  desktop,  laptops, tablets, and phones.

One of the beauties of Unix is that it was itself written largely in C, so it was easy to port from one line of computer, say the DEC PDP 9 to the next, say the DEC PDP 11, and from the Mac built on the Power PC to the Intel X-86. The Unix operating system migrated from telephone systems and switches to workstations from HP, IBM, & Sun, to the NeXT machines and then the Mac.

Back in the late ’80’s and ‘early to mid-’90’s, when I worked as a programmer and DBA on Unix systems, most of the people who used workstations running HPUX, AIX, SunOS and Solaris knew they were working on Unix computers, and were familiar with C, C with Classes, C++, etc. But I would be astounded if today more than 0.01% of the current population of MAC, iPad, iPhone, iPod Touch, or Android users know that they are working on a Unix C / C++ (OS X, iOS) or Linux C/C++  (Android) device. But that’s part of the elegance of Unix.

There’s another elegance to all this. Ritchie worked on the development of an operating environment and software development system which migrated from telephone company labs and network operations centers to the phones that many of us carry in our pockets and on our belts.

Who knew when he wrote “Hello world” that he was introducing us to a new virtual world that was saying hello?

Corporations Are NOT People

_Follow LJF97 on Twitter Tweet  The Supreme Court, in “Citizens United (against the citizens)”  said, as Gov. Romney put it “Corporations are people, my friend.

The people at “Occupy Wall Street” say, “I’ll agree that ‘Corporations are people’ when the government executes one.

and “If a Corporation is a person then why isn’t it murder to declare bankruptcy?

A lawyer I consulted rationalizes the notion that “Corporations are people” by arguing that corporations have the rights to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure, as guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment, in the Bill of Rights, ratified 15, December, 1791.

However,  it is the people who own the corporation and the people who work in the corporation who have the right, guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment, to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure – not the corporation.

The corporation can not exist without owners. A corporation is a piece of property, like a car, a house, a gun, etc. These objects have no rights. When an accused shooter goes on trial, it is the person who allegedly squeezed the trigger, or the person who paid for the “hit.” It is not the weapon. As the National Rifle Association might say, “Guns don’t kill people, people use guns to kill people.”

While people can own one or more corporations, in whole or in part, people may not own other people. This, i.e. slavery, described by Barack Obama as the “Original sin of America,” was claimed under the rubric of “States Rights” referenced in the “Declaration of Causes of Seceding States” on 24, December, 1860. However, it was voided by the Thirteenth Amendment, ratified on 6, December, 1865 and the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified on 9, July, 1868.

Additional counter-arguments can be found in Marjorie Kelly’s “The Divine Right of Capital” (ISBN 1576752372).

Continue reading

Steve Jobs, 1955 – 2011

 

Steve Jobs, with Macbook Air Many of us want to change the world. And we all to to varying extents. Some for the better, some for the worse, some significantly and dramatically, others less so.

Steve Jobs changed the world significantly, dramatically and in many ways for the better.

Because of their focus on “Computers for the rest of us” he and Steve Wozniak could have called the company they built “Prometheus Computers.” The Apple II, Lisa, Mac, Newton, iPod, iTunes store, iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, are, in a sense, like the fire ‘stolen’ in the myth by Prometheus and given to man. Jobs, however, while known for being tough, was not known for being pompous.

He will be missed by his family and friends. His ideas will be missed by the rest of us.

Goodbye Steve, and thanks.

 

100% Clean Renewable Energy in 25 Years

Dolphins surfing
Follow LJF97 on Twitter Tweet The  observable fact that dolphins surf is something we humans need to think about.

Amory Lovins, of the Rocky Mountain Institute, coined the term “Negawatt” when he said “The cheapest unit of energy is the one you don’t have to buy.” The next cheapest, the “Nega-Fuel-Watt” is the unit of energy that doesn’t require fuel.

  • Insulation Nega-Watts allow less power to heat or cool a given space.
  • Solar Nega-Fuel-Watts transform photons into electricity or heat.
  • Wind Nega-Fuel-Watts transform moving particles of air into electricity.
  • Geothermal Nega-Fuel-Watts transform the heat of the earth into heat or electricity, or use thermal gradients to cool a space.
  • Hydro Nega-Fuel-Watts transform moving particles of water – currents – to generate electricity.
100% Clean Energy
100 Gigawatts Wind $300 Billion
100 GW Marine Hydro $300 B
50 GW Solar $200 B
50 GW Geothermal $200 B
200 GW Equiv Efficiency $200 B
A Smart Grid $100 B
500 GW or GW Equiv. $1.3 Trillion

I’m not sure if Lovins first public use of the term Negawatts was in Montreal in 1989 (here) or in Foreign Affairs in 1976 (abstract here), whether 22 or 35 years ago. Regardless, our current energy paradigm today is the hard fuel based path Lovins criticized 35 years ago. While we are turning away from nuclear, as documented by Mycle Schneider in the WorldWatch Report (here) – the latest radioactive nail in the radioactive coffin being the fatal explosion at a reprocessing facility in France on Monday, Sept. 12, 2011 (here) – we burn literally mountains of coal and oceans of oil and gas (According to the DoE, in 2010 we burned 1,085,281 thousand short tons of coal and 15,022 thousand short tons of coke (here). And there are consequences.  We suffer oil spills, polluted water, mercury, coal mine disasters, nuclear power plant melt-downs, we fight wars …

Wind and solar don’t burn fuel. The winds blow, the sun shines, you put a widget in the path of those moving particles in the air or those photons of light and you get electricity – without greenhouse gases, radioactive wastes, toxic wastes, and it costs less. So the question is not ‘Can we meet our energy needs with clean, sustainable renewable energy technologies?” The real question are How? How Much? And How quickly?

We could do it in 25 years if we wanted to.  And we should, for our children, our grandchildren, the cetaceans with whom we share our oceans, and other charismatic megafauna with whom we share our world.

BBC: mob seizes emergency water supply

From Mob takes emergency water supplies during Banbury shortages.  This isn’t inevitable – even in the absence of disaster planning and preparation.  But the converse proposition – that good planning and stockpiling would make this much less likely – seems reasonable.

A water delivery driver in Oxfordshire was forced to abandon his supply of emergency bottles after he was threatened by a group of residents.

The incident took place on Sunday after two Thames Water pumps at the Bretch Hill Reservoir in Banbury failed.
About 4,000 homes were cut off for 24 hours.
The company responded by supplying 68,000 bottles of water to the area. It said some residents had behaved aggressively and prevented deliveries.

‘Tough situation’

A spokesman for Thames Water said it was disappointed by a “minority for their selfish behaviour”.
The contractor concerned was outnumbered by a group who verbally abused him and refused to allow him to take his delivery to another part of the estate – physically removing the bottles from his truck.
The spokesman added they were grateful to the majority of affected customers for their patience and understanding but the behaviour of a few residents had “made a tough situation more difficult for everyone”.
The William Morris School, in Bretch Hill, was closed to pupils as a result of the water shortage which was fixed by about 18:00 BST on Monday.

 

CIA contractor who shot two in controversial incident in Pakistan accused in Colorado parking lot confrontation

The Associated Press reports that Raymond  Davis, the CIA contractor jailed in Pakistan after a shooting in which he shot and killed two assailants, has been charged following an altercation in a parking lot: CIA operative charged in Colo parking spot fight.

HIGHLANDS RANCH, Colo. (AP) — A CIA contractor freed by Pakistani authorities after the families of two men he killed in a shootout agreed to accept a $2.34 million “blood money” payment was charged Saturday in Colorado, with authorities saying he got into a fight over a shopping center parking spot.

Deputies responding to an altercation between two men outside an Einstein Bagel in Highlands Ranch, south of Denver, took Raymond Davis into custody Saturday morning, said Douglas County Sheriff’s Lt. Glenn Peitzmeier. He was charged with third-degree assault and disorderly conduct, both misdemeanors.

Further details on his arrest, which was first reported by KMGH-TV Channel 7 in Denver, were not immediately available.

Peitzmeier said the victim, who was not identified, refused medical treatment at the scene. Davis was freed from the Douglas County jail after posting bond, Peitzmeier said.

The Denver Post has since reported that Davis may face serious charges:  Former CIA contractor may face felony count in parking fight.

It’s easy to draw a simple inference:  Davis is bad-tempered with a short fuse, and the parking lot incident shows that he’s really a bad guy. We reject this inference for the following reasons

  1. Mr. Davis  – no matter what happened in the original incident in Pakistan, has clearly  not gotten a fair shake; he’s been used as a pawn in an international game of chicken between the United States and Pakistan, a government which contains powerful factions which, with some regularity, attack targets in India, within Pakistan, and within Afghanistan. Some of those attacks are best described as assassinations; others are, using any reasonable definition, terrorism.
  2. Because he’s merely a “contractor,” he’s entirely expendable if it suits U.S. diplomatic interests;
  3. And – again, because he’s a “contractor,” he’s not entitled to the same consideration as he would if he were an employee:  pension  or disability payments, psychological help, medical help, employment – not least the comfort and community provided by colleagues.

We don’t know what happened in the parking lot – perhaps he did do something reprehensible. But maybe not.  At a minimum, he’s entitled to a fair hearing on the Colorado charges. And whatever happened in Colorado, in moral terms, what makes him different than any other person serving abroad for CIA, the State Department, AID, or the military?

One more argument against “outsourcing” critical functions.

 

 

Impacted Nurse: "Critical Incident Stress Debriefings" Re-Examined

Follow LJF97 on Twitter Tweet  A look at psychological first aid replacing critical incident debriefs. may tell us a bit more about assuming that all not people respond the same way to a given incident – or to a given therapy.  Or maybe they do. From the brilliant blog  Impacted Nurse, quoting in turn from Vaughan Bell at Mind Hacks:

“This technique is now not recommended because we know it is at best useless and probably harmful, owing to the fact that it seems to increase trauma in the long-term.

Instead, we use an approach called psychological first aid, which, instead of encouraging people to talk about all their emotions, really just focuses on making sure people feel secure and connected.  
Psychological first aid is actually remarkable for the fact that it contains so little psychology, as you can see from the just released psychological first aid manual from the World Health Organisation.
You don’t need to be a mental health professional to use the techniques and they largely consist of looking after the practical needs of the person plus working toward making them feel safe and comfortable.

No processing of emotions, no ‘disaster narratives’, no fancy psychology, its really just being practical, gentle and kind.”

Via Mindhacks – Escaping from the past of disaster psychology. As noted above, via Impacted Nurse.

 

Protesting Marked Cards and a Stacked Deck

Warren Buffett_ Follow LJF97 on Twitter Tweet  I spoke with two of the Wall Street protesters this morning. We discussed credit unions, other cooperative ventures, Buckminster Fuller’s ideas, capitalism, and productivity. (“A 4-day work week,” Fuller was quoted as saying, “would give us time to enjoy the wealth we create.”)  We didn’t talk about Warren Buffett or President Obama, but it seems that both would agree with the protesters’ sentiments, as I do, that our financial system “favors the rich and powerful at the expense of ordinary citizens.” (The protests and the protesters’ motives were described here by Colin Moynihan in the New York Times, Sept. 17, 2011.) The protests are also covered by Think Progress, here.

Buffett, in “Stop Coddling the Super-Rich“, published in the NY Times, said

I paid … only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.

Obama’s initiative is explained on White House . gov and Talking Points Memo, and by Obama in recent days, “It’s not class warfare,” he said, “it’s math” and “If it’s class warfare,” he said in Ohio and Kentucky, while discussing an old bridge between southwestern Ohio and Kentucky that needs to be renovated, “I’m a warrior for the Middle Class.”

Move On has a petition here, saying, “I agree with Buffett – and Obama.”

Despite the evidence, from the 2001 to the present, that cutting taxes on rich people does not create jobs, Charles Gasparino, in the New York Post, a Rupert “We-hack-cell-phones-for-fun-and-profit” Murdoch product, said, here, “taxing the rich will destroy jobs.”

Gasparino is clearly wrong. And Buffett and Obama are clearly correct. Rich people can afford to pay higher taxes, and asking them to pay 17.4% while others, who need to spend a much higher percentage of their income on food, clothes, and housing, pay 33% to 41% does not seem fair.

But the question is “What do we do with the money?” Buffett has also said that he would never have made the money he made had he not been born in the United States, and had he not gone to Columbia University and studied “Value Investing.” He basically argues that the cultural climate and economic systems in the United States enabled him to become wealthy, that this is a good thing, and others deserve the same opportunities. “We must plan for the future and invest in infrastructure. And the wealthy should pay their fair share. ”

Tax policy must be linked to fiscal policy. What we are doing today, Obama, Buffett, and the protesters would say, is using tax policy to make rich people more rich. They would argue, and I would agree, we should use tax policy to develop infrastructure. One idea is to build a 40 kilowatt photovoltaic solar array on each of the 92,000 public schools in the United States.  Solar only generates power during the day; schools need most of their power during the day. This would use tax revenues to pay for infrastructure upgrade – and tax revenues pay public schools electric bills. PV Solar systems provide energy without pollution, without toxic wastes, without greenhouse gases. And in the event of an emergency, if disconnected from the grid, we would have a network of 92,000 local emergency shelters with power during the day, when the sun is shining.

Marked cards and a stacked deck are great when you’re doing card tricks. But don’t play poker against a cheater using them.

Beyond Fuel – for the 21st Century – Cocoa Beach, Sept. 17

Space Coast Green Living Festival

Follow LJF97 on Twitter Tweet I will be presenting Beyond Fuel: From Consuming Natural Resources to Harnessing Natural Processes at the Space Coast Green Living Festival, Cocoa Beach, Florida, Sept 17, 2011.  The festival  is sponsored by the Cocoa Beach Surfrider Foundation and the Sierra Club Turtle Coast Group. It will be at the Cocoa Beach Courtyard by Marriott. Haley Sales, (Website / Facebook / Youtube),a local singer / songwriter, will perform.

Hayley Sales

Our current energy paradigm today is to fuel based. We burn oceans of oil and methane mountains of coal. And there are consequences.  We suffer oil spills, polluted water, mercury, coal mine disasters, nuclear power plant melt-downs, we fight wars …

According to the DoE, in 2010 we burned 1,085,281 thousand short tons of coal and 15,022 thousand short tons of coke (here).

Wind and solar don’t burn fuel. The winds blow, the sun shines, you put a widget in the path of those moving particles in the air or those photons of light and you get electricity – without greenhouse gases, radioactive wastes, toxic wastes, and it costs less. So the question is not ‘Can we meet our energy needs with clean, sustainable renewable energy technologies?” The real question are How? How Much? And How quickly?

100% Clean Energy
100 Gigawatts Wind $300 Billion
100 GW Marine Hydro $300 B
50 GW Solar $200 B
50 GW Geothermal $200 B
200 GW Equiv Efficiency $200 B
A Smart Grid $100 B
500 GW or GW Equiv. $1.3 Trillion

And we could do it within 25 Years if we wanted to.

Amory Lovins, of the Rocky Mountain Institute, coined the term “Negawatt” to mean energy you don’t need to buy, as in “The cheapest unit of energy is the one you don’t have to buy.” The next cheapest, the “nega-fuel-watt” is the unit of energy that doesn’t require fuel.

Nuclear Power: Present Tense

Follow LJF97 on TwitterTweetNuclear Power: Accident in France Kills 1, Injures 4NPR, and the Associated Press report “An explosion at a nuclear waste facility in southern France killed one person and injured four on Monday… The Nuclear Safety Authority declared the accident “terminated” soon after the blast at a furnace in the Centraco site, in the southern Languedoc-Roussillon region, about 20 miles (32 kilometers) from the city of Avignon. One of the injured suffered severe burns.”

The DC Bureau reported “The workers were operating a high temperature industrial oven that burns low-level nuclear waste in a sealed building when the unit blew up. The worker who was killed was burned so badly his body was carbonized, according to officials.”

The French Nuclear Safety Authority, analogous to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or maybe Vichy, designated the accident as a 1 on a scale from 0 to 9.

While a death in an industrial accident is tragic, and while a worker could die as a result of injuries sustained falling off the nacelle of a wind turbine or a roof while installing or working on a solar array, it is probably impossible for a worker to get ‘Carbonized’ working on a wind turbine or solar farm. Continue reading