Pelosi Claims Government Created the iPhone, Not Steve Jobs or Apple
To quote our Dear Leader, "If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."
And that sums up the mindset of those who want to control our lives. They know better. Or something.
And that sums up the mindset of those who want to control our lives. They know better. Or something.
Pelosi (and Obama - and Hillary) are pure evil for saying such things. Their attacks on Capitalism are soooo un-American.
This is a rare time that I get to do both at the same time.
Three or four days ago I referred to some of Hitlery's help as "flying monkeys."
Must admit to my making light of what I truly regard as a war between good and evil (or freedom vs enslavement).
But then again maybe a mental picture is worth a thousand words.
May the light side of the Force be with you.
It has to be the government or some such group that invents it can't possibly be the creative genius of aan individual that see just the right way to combine things to make a newer better thing.Creating music, art a story or novel. the ideas are there but the genius of combining them in just the right way, that take an individual driven to create. It is the individuals drive to create that sparks the world.
[My apologies for lifting some much so poorly from The Fountainhead}
By her logic, since she believes in anthropogenic climate change, she must find government responsible for it too. Wait... she is constantly spewing hot air... :)
Respectfully,
O.A.
Government investment is supportive, but generally not required. Almost no technology breakthroughs come from government investment.
Someone really wants to argue that the government investment is affordable and owed? What is the specific value provided by the government over the development period divided by the corporate tax in $. Then compare the technology in the product divided by the development cost really paid. Not even same order of magnitude. Government contribution is 1) small, and 2) horribly inefficient.
My response to this is that government is wasteful and unaccountable to anyone, and don't tell me the taxpayers. The taxpayers can not be expected to follow this monumental convoluted money trail individually.
Pure, misleading, thieving, totalitarian evil to make such statements. Not one bit different than Lenin and Stalin.
This is the kind of thing Trump and Johnson need to latch on to as the evil perpetrated by the Hildebeast, Pelosi and Warren. Evil, lying unaccountable. "Don't tell us about the wealthy corporations fleecing the workers. You are the "special people", distorting blind justice, and getting rich and powerful off the taxpayers. You are Lenin. You are Stalin."
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
iPhone/Inventors/
Charles J. Pisula
Chris Blumenberg
Wayne C. Westerman
Henri C. Lamiraux
Paul D. Marcos
Marcel van Os
Steve Jobs
Nitin K. Ganatra
Richard Williamson
Stephen O. Lemay
Andre M.J. Boule
Kenneth Kocienda
Francisco Ryan Tolmasky
Freddy Allen Anzures
Scott Herz
Virgil Scott King
Greg Christie
Jeffrey Bush
Jeremy A. Wyld
Scott Forstall
Bas Ording
Patrick Lee Coffman
Michael Matas
Gregory Novick
Imran Chaudhri
Search Results
Who Invented The iPhone? - Inventors - About.com
inventors.about.com › ... › Famous Invention History - I
It was Apple co-founder, Steve Jobs who directed Apple's engineers to develop a touch screen, mobile phone. Jobs at first was considering an Apple tablet computer, that desire eventually manifested in the iPad, and Apple had already produced a palm device with a touch screen, the Newton MessagePad.
iPhone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Notice first the name Stupid or Pelosillyni is nowhere on the list.
It's like cell phones
Martin Cooper (inventor) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_...
Jump to Cellular Business Systems - Inventing the handheld cellular Mobile phone. Making world's first handheld cellular mobile phone call. Martin "Marty" Cooper (born December 26, 1928) is an American engineer. He is a pioneer and visionary in the wireless communications industry. Nope doesn't come close to spelling Nancy Stupid.
Let's try one more....
Brief History of the Internet
Barry M. Leiner, Vinton G. Cerf, David D. Clark, Robert E. Kahn, Leonard Kleinrock, Daniel C. Lynch, Jon Postel, Larry G. Roberts, Stephen Wolff
Origins of the Internet
The Initial Internetting
Concepts Proving the Ideas
Transition to Widespread Infrastructure
The Role of Documentation
Formation of the Broad Community
Commercialization of the Technology
History of the Future
Footnotes
Timeline
References
Authors
Introduction
The Internet has revolutionized the computer and communications world like nothing before. The invention of the telegraph, telephone, radio, and computer set the stage for this unprecedented integration of capabilities. The Internet is at once a world-wide broadcasting capability, a mechanism for information dissemination, and a medium for collaboration and interaction between individuals and their computers without regard for geographic location. The Internet represents one of the most successful examples of the benefits of sustained investment and commitment to research and development of information infrastructure. Beginning with the early research in packet switching, the government, industry and academia have been partners in evolving and deploying this exciting new technology. Today, terms like "bleiner@computer.org" and "http://www.acm.org" trip lightly off the tongue of the random person on the street. 1
This is intended to be a brief, necessarily cursory and incomplete history. Much material currently exists about the Internet, covering history, technology, and usage. A trip to almost any bookstore will find shelves of material written about the Internet. 2
In this paper,3 several of us involved in the development and evolution of the Internet share our views of its origins and history. This history revolves around four distinct aspects. There is the technological evolution that began with early research on packet switching and the ARPANET (and related technologies), and where current research continues to expand the horizons of the infrastructure along several dimensions, such as scale, performance, and higher-level functionality. There is the operations and management aspect of a global and complex operational infrastructure. There is the social aspect, which resulted in a broad community of Internauts working together to create and evolve the technology. And there is the commercialization aspect, resulting in an extremely effective transition of research results into a broadly deployed and available information infrastructure.
The Internet today is a widespread information infrastructure, the initial prototype of what is often called the National (or Global or Galactic) Information Infrastructure. Its history is complex and involves many aspects - technological, organizational, and community. And its influence reaches not only to the technical fields of computer communications but
In late 1966 Roberts went to DARPA to develop the com.... see internet society.org
If Pelosi had guessed internet she would still have been wrong it was a consulting lab working for ARPA and that's as close to a government connection as one could get.
As late as 1984 the government hadn't figured out with the new computer technology one didn't have to imitate form s made for type writers.....
One of the wonderful things Comrade Nancy is the net will giver you the correct answers you airhead you.
That article provides a link to this infographic which substantiates the basic claim that government-funded research is important to technologic progress:
http://www.aau.edu/research/smartphon...
The fundamental thesis was annunciated by Vannevar Bush, head of the U.S. Office of Scientific Research and Development: fund everything because you never know what will pay back critical returns.
As for Al Gore and the Internet, it is true that Al Gore, Sr., was a proponent of the federal highway system. Thus, Al Gore, Jr., saw the first computer networks as the foundation for an "information superhighway." His science advisor, Dr. Michael Nelson, became the White House Science advisor in the Clinton Administration. Sen. Gore, Jr., introduced his legislation three times across three sessions before the collective of Congress understood what he was proposing. I have a rather large file scanned from an article that I wrote for Telecomputing magazine in 1991 that tells the story.
All of that was a consequence of "the wizard war." World War II was fought with rockets, computers, and atomic bombs. What is missing from Sen. Pelosi's narrative is the essential element of individual initiative in a free society. The Germans and Russians also poured tons of money into scientific research. The Russians had to let their chief aircraft designer out of prison. in 1938, Stalin had the entire profession arrested on suspicion of disloyalty. The failure the German atomic bomb project is a paradigm.
As for email, Shiva Ayyandurai was 14 years old and living in India when he created an interoffice system with Inbox, Outbox, folders, etc., (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/m...) However, that only underscores the fact that a free society is essential to technical progress. Ayyandurai emigrated to America with his parents, attended MIT, and then returned to India to take up that same kind of basic funding. It did not go well.
"In 2009, Ayyadurai was hired by India's Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, India's largest science agency, by its director general, Samir K. Brahmachari. CSIR was mandated to create a new company, CSIR Tech, that would establish businesses using the research conducted by country's many publicly owned laboratories. Ayyadurai reported that he had spent months trying to create a business plan for CSIR Tech, but received no response from Brahmachari. Ayyadurai then distributed a draft plan, which was not authorized by CSIR, to the agency's scientists that requested feedback and criticized management. His job offer was subsequently withdrawn five months after the position was offered." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiva_A...
"Our Germans [were] better than their Germans."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dSkX...
The biopic *I Aim for the Stars" with Kurt Juergen as Wernher von Braun was parodied as "I Aim for the Stars... but only hit London."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEJ9H...
Regarding Pelosi's comments, good ideas are everywhere. All the value is in commercializing them. As for the funding the research that will lead to new technologies, "lean" business is the rage now, BUT that does not mean the only way to invest in long-term technologies is by taking our money by force. Thinks about that way of saying what Pelosi said. She's holding up her phone and saying no investors would have voluntarily invested MEMS, battery chemistry, photolithographic IC etching. We had to take your money, she says, and in the end you're glad they did. It's absurd.
He did vote for the HisRoyalMuslim twice and today admitted to having planned to vote for Hillary (unless Johnson has polled in double digits.)
;^)
That one blows my mind too. People say they truly interpreted his words to mean we could provide healthcare for millions of people, mostly one's ineligible for insurance because they're already sick or are at high risk, and it wouldn't cost anything. I'm pretty sure half of the indignation is false, and maybe half of the people really think gov't can't pass a law and make goods and services appear without work like magic. The foolishiness of it is mind-blowing.
Noone was expecting that the government would be successful. They were complaining about the President's complete and willful disregard for market forces.
https://youtu.be/qgce06Yw2ro
Force them like with a gun? This is precisely why I lobbied unsuccessfully against the plan. Purchases that used to individual decisions are now subject for public debate. If we can't get someone else to pay for what we want, it seems like being forced. Most (not all) of these people who can't afford their medical care would be better off without gov't involvement. When people say the gov't fooled them into thinking the law would create goods and services, it just blows my mind.
That lack of reasoning and lack of effort has virtually destroyed our future.
Right. It's not even lack of homework, more lack of common sense.
Call Dems for what they are: liars and you'll make the first real step into reality. By continuing to persuade yourself that you can pull the lever for a Democrat, you only lie to yourself.
As a Brit acquaintance of mine says, "It's time to call a bloody spade a shovel!"
Liars they are and liars they will always be. They cannot defend their premisis with any degree of logic, so lies and obfuscation are their alternatives.
I was in a discussion with an average guy ex military about 60. He was more or less uninformed about the govt. and somewhat indifferent to current issues. I pointed out some outright lies that are very disturbing. His indifferent response was an acceptance that all politicians lie. Americans accept this behavior.
If I were to lie to my clients they would fire me or sue as they should.
Would you feel better having Republicans? Because that's the result of supporting candidates with no chance of winning. Every time you pull the lever for them, you're indirectly supporting something far worse.
Would Republicans have pushed Obamacare? Nope. Every single one voted against it. Are Republicans pushing Fast and Furious? Did Republicans target conservatives via the IRS? Were Republicans the ones supplying arms to Al Queda under the guise of toppling Egypt? I can go on... and on... and on... And don't get me started on the economy.
Are Republicans perfect? Nope. But I'll take a Republican every single solitary day over a Democrat. Want to know why? Because I know that the Democrat is lying to me when he says he is all about the people. He's all about power and the expansion of it. I know that at least I have a chance at sanity with a Republican. Are there some Republicans better than others? Absolutely. With Democrats I know I'm getting a rotten apple every time.
And the only way one wins an election is to get the votes. Elections are never lost until the final tally. I reject the defeatist mindset that says that candidate X can't win. I vote my principles and let the cards fall where they may.
Vague hand-waving doesn't cut it. Cite the policy, who instigated it on the Republican side, who opposed it on the Democrat side, and which Amendment it violates according to you. If you're not willing to go into that level of detail, this conversation provides zero value to me and I'm done.
How's that working out?
https://youtu.be/_o65vMUk5so
The rhetoric that says gov't can pass a law and make goods and services flow to you for free is what I have the problem with. Maybe that's what many of the critics are saying. The indignation makes them come off as if they're saying hoocudanode..
The gentleman from the great state of South Carolina was right when he shouted "You Lie!" to our Dear Leader. His critics were very, very wrong.
I don't want to debate if they were good people (maybe because I'm not that knowledgeable about it), but I am concerned our system either encourages statism or (if you think it was a few bad politicians) is not robust against elected statists. It's a grave problem. The only answer I've heard is the US Constitution, but right now that's not working b/c we slowly expand what it allows gov't to do, and there are no structures stopping it.
I like the fact that Gary Johnson acknowledges this aloud as a problem in a calm way and admits if elected he alone can't solve it.
Brett Scott posted the full quote.
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
LOL. This is stupid.
I don't excuse politicians for a word they say in scripted remarks. Those speeches are written and re-written to match the rhetoric and beliefs of the candidates themselves. There is no such thing as a "poor choice of words". What really happens is the facade of politi-speak drops just long enough to see the actual candidate for all their delusion and intent. The lies are exposed for exactly what they are.