Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Carlos E.R." Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,alt.comp.os.windows-11 Subject: Re: The "Standards" Game Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2025 13:02:34 +0100 Lines: 50 Message-ID: References: <106mke5$1di32$1@dont-email.me> <106ukm1$35g8p$3@toylet.eternal-september.org> <106v67a$1cgol$1@news1.tnib.de> <106vfvv$3bpmd$1@toylet.eternal-september.org> <106vi4r$3c9cr$2@dont-email.me> <3ihcmlx47d.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <1070cqj$3jkmu$1@dont-email.me> <1071hu3$1idk1$1@news1.tnib.de> <9fjemlxbio.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <6jefmlxb6j.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <10884l7$173em$1@dont-email.me> <1089ge2$1fvl9$8@dont-email.me> <10g52v4$3o78s$4@dont-email.me> <10g7bqf$j278$2@dont-email.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net /4oTj+6cStkl5ZzoEBrslALx3Ad3Oho8TpNcLVAn35+FOppJPF X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:l3MQQBxOzAFMFzKsLLRn9ICv5AU= sha256:D4vGSS0tpOJFea3pF+35DsLzai5sGH8qvYDMGj07WCI= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: es-ES, en-CA In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:78012 alt.comp.os.windows-11:27626 On 2025-11-28 07:39, c186282 wrote: > On 11/27/25 08:51, Lars Poulsen wrote: >> On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 03:12:59 -0000 (UTC), Lars Poulsen wrote: >>>>>> The academics building the Internet did not participate in this >>>>>> process, >>>>>> but the engineers doing the work went and swapped ideas, and once >>>>>> they >>>>>> had working code, published open standards before patents could be >>>>>> filed. We all know how this outcompeted the ITU and IEEE standards. >> >>   On 2025-11-25, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >>>>> Counterexamples: IEEE 754, IEEE 802, IEEE 1003 ... >> On 26/11/2025 14:33, Lars Poulsen wrote: >>>> Touché! >> >> On 2025-11-26, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> these were all pragmatic harmonisations of existing solutions. >>> What did NOT work were the X protocols - so big only a mainframe could >>> implement  them. >>> >>> TCP/IP was light and pragmatic and developed as the need arose. >> >> One of the fundamental reasons why TCP/IP worked much better was the >> notion of "well-known ports". The ISO/X people insisted that this level >> of resolution was a function of the Directory ... to be defined later. >> >> Long after MILnet was up and running for years, the Pentagon >> commissioned a military-wide email system based on X.500 etc, and a >> remember shaking my head at a press release celebrating the successful >> installation and activastion of that system. The gateway between that >> "official" system and the real, working global system was incredibly >> clunky, and it was almost impossible to create a message that could get >> across. In contrast, MCI created a working gateway so send ARPAnet >> email to any TELEX machine. (But then they had Vint Cerf heading up >> their networking efforts!) > > >   Put a committee onto anything and expect a >   long-delayed expensive total clusterfuck. > GSM was designed by committee and it is a wonderful thing the entire world has adopted. Even the USA dumped their own system(s) and switched lovingly. :-D -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;