They kind of fix this in the lede, but dude did not invent the internet, he invented the World Wide Web. The internet is a superset of a whole bunch of things that includes the World Wide Web, but dude wasn’t out there inventing TCP/IP and routers and whatnot.
Nowhere does it say he calls himself the creator. I'd be looking at the media for labelling him that.
They're replying to the article title, which was incorrect but has now been fixed.
Nowhere did they say he called himself the creator, either. They only replied to the statement presented.
You're thinking of the ARPANET. When people think of the Internet. They think of the network that Gore pushed hard to open to the public. And the interface Lee designed. Gopher is having a small resurgence, and Gemini exists. But effectively what the average person sees as the Internet is their child philosophically.
I mean as a techy you aren't wrong. There's a lot of underlying things and technologies that sort of glosses over. But to the layperson at large we're just pedantically nitpicking.
Gopher is having a small resurgence, and Gemini exists.
You forgot email. That seems like a pretty important use of the Internet that isn't the web.
And the "World Wide Web" mostly means HTML - "hypertext" documents which can be published on the internet, and which are regular documents but with embedded links to other documents (hyperlinks), and a vision to ultimately create the "semantic web" - human-readable text which can also be processed by computers.
To be exact, Tim Berners Lee invented the original HTML specification, the HTTP communication protocol, and a proof-of-concept browser that implements both of them. These three things were required - on top of TCP, IP, Ethernets, that already existed - to build the Web.
The original hypertext proposal was even more complex than what we ended up getting, connecting ideas both ways.
People say wifi when they mean the Internet, somehow one cannot expect accuracy. Articles always get written by professional clueless people also.
You supported DRM dude. Self critique, renounce your mistakes, and if you really want to go after ICANN, give me a call.
I'd give anything for the internet to go back to how it was in the early/mid 90s.
Back before it was corporatized, monetized and before all the gardens started building their walls.
*web inventor
"The internet should be for everyone, except the people I don't like." - average modern internet user
Glad he's able to call out the domain name system for the crock of shit that it is.
The fact that no one is challenging "internet inventor Tim Berners-Lee" is making me want to blow up my desktop
Sadly most people don't understand the difference between www and the internet.
It's always the fucking DNS. .__.
The internet isn't broken... Humanity is.
I don't know, the thing about the internet is that it does bring a ton of value, and operating it does have costs in turn. Maybe Sir Tim is right about DNS being the point where it got commercial, but it was going to happen somehow. Arxiv and Wikipedia still exist, but how do you do Amazon non-commercially? Even YouTube is a challenge.
There used to be a sort of mantra that technology was neutral and people are good and bad. But actually, that’s not true of things on the web
Arguably, that's not the distinction. Technologies can be explicitly of control or of chaos. And then that relative structure or freedom can itself be used for good or for evil.
A central platform is of control, Lemmy or Linux is of chaos. And obviously we lean towards the latter a lot, but for some things even Lemmy wants central control and monitoring, so it's not evil, exactly.
How you do amazon nonprofit is easy. Its already a giant planned economy, just take the profit out and make every vendor pay the cost for using it, Servers delivery etc. The workers would get payed well and the incentive from the public to support it is there, people want this convience and are willing to spend for it.
I would make a somewhat controversial case that one of the main ruiners of the internet and our entire social contract has been the "free with marketing" model that replaced subscriptions.
If we're going to live in a goods/services/money climate, I'm fine with different companies or media distributors charging subscription fees to pay for their costs. It makes sense, it's been a working model since the early days of the internet.
What started to become a problem is when more and more services went to "free" models. Now the revenue comes from advertisers, so that comes with a train of baggage. Now producers of content are incentivized to make everything a race to see who gets user attention first and fastest for those sweet, sweet clicks. It is the main contributing factor to public attention-span erosion and the way most people have become willfully ignorant about the outside world. Additionally, content has to be moderated and censored because we wouldn't want to scare off the precious advertisers. It's enough to make you want to roblox yourself in minecraft.
Imagine if Youtube broadly was a paid service. You pay premium and there's no algorithm. No "feed based on your marketing preferences." No 20-mile long list of AI slop videos with sensational titles to get you to click on them, because the creators aren't making money from clicks but real subscribers who want to see more of the actual content.
Same with many other huge media sites, even social media. If they weren't beholdened to attention-spans and sensationalism, we would see far less outright propaganda and lies.
I feel like this model has ruined a lot of gaming too, and has allowed publishers to release shitty, unfinished games for free with no moderation for MMO's and no real care or passion for making a game people want to come back to, and instead just make slop games with skins for impulse shoppers.
The article site itself is a good example of what's wrong with the internet.
The guardian used a "pay or ok" model for cookie acceptance.
Archive link to avoid that nonsense: https://archive.ph/pHNdt
So I was tuning into ~~this guy~~ another person testifying to Congress the other day by the name of Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath. Supposed neuroscientist, etc. Testifying to the effects of digital learning, pads, etc.
Something just rubbed me the wrong way about him. Especially when you see the likes of Ted Cruz talking him up.
Dude is heavily pushed by Moms for Liberty and "The Free Press" which we all know is a right-wing propaganda wing that gave us none other than Bari Weiss.
I think the play here may be that they want to isolate children from the broader world and being exposed to other viewpoints. My gut instinct is that they're trying to construct the framework to justify isolationism and promote a Christo-Fascist society.
I say this as someone who thanks the internet (especially in earlier decades) for changing multiple generations of my family from rural conservative Republican to progressive-left. The same reason they attack publicly-funded news like NPR or PBS, or Big Bird and Mr. Rogers.
These things teach critical-thinking and kindness and make fearmongering less effective.
WWW has been a complete crapshow ever since it started simply because it became popular.
It was designed to serve documents over the internet, except everyone co-opted for their own needs like websites, APIs, etc.
That left us with broken as hell crap at every layer from the joke that is HTML/CSS, the clownshow that is HTTP, and the circus that is JavaScript.
And don't even get the started on the mountain of vulnerabilities being stupid obvious crap that wouldn't dare to fly in even basic GNU utilities at the time.
Adding insult to injury, this guy hasn't even provided a valid solution to this mess like hyphanet or the very newly released freenet.
Which by the way tries to hack cheat the system with WebAssembly so that it doesn't have to deal with HTTPS directly since its an exclusive client server protocol.
the search providers (especially that famously 'not evil' one) had a huge hand in centralising and then gatekeeping access to 'the web'. They have such a disproportionately powerful effect on how users discover content, and huge power to drive self-fulfilling 'network effects' where people go where people already are, which has become so normalised that most people couldn't imagine 'the web' without them.
i'm not suggesting it was ever realistic or possible, but what we needed was for that one search provider and indexer of content to be broken up, partially nationalised, and partially integrated into the network specification itself. Only they are powerful enough to become a model for how to functionally disentangle their operations into public and private parts.
the only alternative is to break the centralisation of the web as china is doing and other BRICS nations intend to do, by creating 'national internets' which in some ways federate together and in other ways do not. I don't like this model of development for the future of the internet but the security considerations of the present require this kind of approach.
“The internet” should just be dumb pipes that transport bits. Period.
A series of tubes, if you will. Not a big truck.
I have a simple fix but that which is difficult by virtue of momentum of the people. Don't visit corporate websites. Avoid google, microsoft, meta, reddit, youtube. Its much more difficult to avoid: whatsapp and maybe messenger if your family is on it. I would argue for photos and online drive, proton is good but i guess the CEO is trying to become/has become a tech bro like the others. so you have to figure out if alternatives like immich (self hosting) or other hosting providers are not fascist.
We should talk about these alternatives all the time to get them into everyday lingo such that people recommend those to others.
Can we change the title to web inventor? I am guilty of using them interchangeably as well, but he did not invent the internet. And I used the internet before the web existed lol.
Yes PLEASE! The Internet is so, so much more than the Web, it existed before it and it will exist long after the Web has been gone.
The INTERNET as a whole also has still many places that are still healthy and far away from enshittification.
He didn't invent the internet.
Yeah, that was Al Gore!
Note that what Gore said was that he "took the initiative to create the Internet". That's actually true; his lobby work for a civilian network were one of the most significant factors in commercializing ARPANET. He never claimed that he invented the thing.
The solution is that it needs to be difficult to go online. Like a 5 minute wait time, with some sort of logic puzzle you need to solve.
Please correct the post title: it says "internet inventor" (which is incorrect) and "soul of the web", while the article name says "web inventor" and "soul of the internet"
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/