Government 2.0? Is it possible??

Government is one of the most important aspects in the world today. We are growing up under this government in the so-called “Information Age”. Every day, especially in our generation, technology is advancing rapidly. Think of cell phones. 8 years ago we had green screens with black font, now we have internet and streaming videos and even pc applications. Point is, in a time of growing technology, I do not think that the government is utilizing this technology properly. Granted, they do supply some information via web, but for the most part they are not getting the public involved enough with government through technology.

I think one way government can utilize technology and make it more accessible is by giving the people the choice to choose what they want to do with their money that they give to the government. I read this comment from someone on the Slashdot site and thought it to be very interesting. Americans pay millions, if not billions of taxes a year. Where does that money go? What does the government use it for? We do not know. The blogger brought up an interesting point to allow those who pay taxes to the government to choose which department they want their taxes to go. If someone wants their taxes to go to the Department of Agriculture, so be it. If someone wants their taxes to go towards the war in Iraq, so be it. The blogger also stated that it should only be a small percentage of the tax. If the idea is successful, then they should increase the amount you can redirect to a certain field. This also allows the government to be more transparent and accessible because it gets people involved with government by allowing them to choose what they want to do (basically a true democracy). This in turn, will allow the government to see what the American people truly want. It will reduce criticism of the government and let them know what the American people truly want (because in my opinion, 60% of the policies enacted are not in favor of the public).

As good as this idea is, I did find some drawbacks to it. The first drawback I found is that if people can choose where they want their taxes spent, some areas may get more money than other critical fields that need money. For example, if we are at war, people may want to donate more money to the Department of Defense rather than the Department of Agriculture. This could prove devastating for the economy and the farmers of America. This would probably prove most devastating if the idea of donating a small percentage of your tax dollars grew into donating all of your taxes to a certain department. Overall, I do not think the government will ever allow people to choose where they want their taxes to go. The government distributes taxes to departments that need it. This may not seem true when you think about the billions of dollars it cost to make one missile or one F-16, but those smaller agencies are receiving some of the money.

I think this is a good idea to allow a small percentage of your taxes to go to a department you want. Will it ever happen? Well, that is up to government and I do not think they would be too fond of this idea.

Journalism: USA TODAY v. NEW YORK TIMES

Journalism comes in many different forms. There are magazines, websites, blogsites, thousands of different newspapers that report local, state, national and world news. Out of all these mediums in which we (the consumer) find out what is going on in today’s world, I believe that the newspaper is the most important and most favored source of information. Every state has hundreds of different papers. New York City has the New York Times, The New York Post, The Daily News, The New York Observer, The New Press, the Wall Street Journal, The Chief Leader, the Villager, and many others. There are hundreds of different companies in which to receive information. The question comes into hand when reading online news sources and material paper newspapers. Some online sites can be biased on events worldwide or nationally based on their location. For example the New York Times may report that Michael Bloomberg is a great mayor of New York City, while the San Francisco Guardian may have reports that he isn’t a good mayor. Other cases exist in the mediums of Fox News and News 12 Buffalo. Fox news tends to be very right wing republican based, while a smaller news channel like the Buffalo News may be less biased because it is smaller and more focused on local situations. Point is, the consumer who reads a newspaper must be very careful on where they get there sources of information from; when you think about it, no matter what, no one can write about a topic without some opinion.

I chose to compare the newspaper USA Today and the New York Times.com. I found an article that both mediums decided to write about on October 31, 2008. In USA Today, the article is titled “Economy shrank last quarter: GDP; consumer spending fall; worst is yet to come.” In the NY Times, it is titled: “Economy Shrinks as Consumers Cut Back.” After reading the two articles I noticed some differences and some similarities. The first difference I noticed was the length of the article. The topic only received an eighth of a page in the USA Today while the article on the NY Times was probably about 2 pages long. Other differences included the sources of quotes. I noticed that the USA Today tended to get quotes from nationwide, but not very heard-of economists from around the country. The NY Times tended to get their sources from local NYC research and construction firms. These are pretty much the only differences I found.

The two articles were more similar than different. I did notice that all the statistics were exact in each source. The USA Today for example reported, “Consumer spending, two-thirds of economic activity, plummeted at a 3.1% rate—the steepest fall since 1980”. The NY Times reported: “Personal consumption fell at an annual rate of 3.1 percent in the third quarter of this year, its biggest drop since 1980, when the economy was in a deep recession.” As you can see the facts are almost replica, minus the fact that the NY Times is a bit more specific (they tell which quarter and what was going on in 1980 briefly). I did notice that the USA Today was published on October 31st, 2008 and the NY Times article was uploaded at 8 AM yesterday. Perhaps maybe the USA Today stole facts about the current situation.
Online news differs from print news in several ways. For one, online news gives you access to hundreds of more articles. This implies that online news sources have thousands of people working daily reporting tons of different topics. The other differences are in the ease of accessibility. As popular as online news is, people don’t always want to have to go online to read sites. In a world where everyone has some place to be or kids have 30 minutes before class starts to write a blog, paper printed newspapers are always going to be more valuable. People are constantly on the run, and constantly stopping in stores. Almost every store you go into sells newspapers for under a dollar. No matter how popular online journalism becomes, it will never void out hard copy newspapers.

Wikipedia says that journalism is “the profession of writing or communicating, formally employed by publications and broadcasters, for the benefit of a particular community of people. The writer or journalist is expected to use facts to describe events, ideas, or issues that are relevant to the public.” I agree with the first part. Newspapers are based on local demand. The New York Post contains information pertaining to New York and surrounding areas. The Washington Post is based on a more national level. There are several obvious differences. I do not think there were many differences with my articles because it has to do with money and statistics, and you can really bullshit that. I can see how other articles, perhaps pertaining to sports or politics can be somewhat one-sided. For example, the New York Post main page says: “Mets fired up. Philly’s win is motivation for the team” (being that the Mets and Philly’s are rivals. I went to USA TODAY and their main report in the sports section is “Drought over, Phillies seek refill: Core champs back for 2009.” So you can see the difference in reporting style based on the location.

Works Cited:
1) leonhardt, david (2008, October, 30). Economy Shrinks as Consumers Cut Back. New York Times, Retrieved October 31, 2008, from http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/30/economy-shrinks-as-consumers-cut-back/?scp=1&sq=gdp%20economy&st=cse

2) Kirchoff, Sue Economy Shrank last quarter. (2008, October 31). USA TODAY, p. B1

3) Wikipedia. October 28th 2008. “Journalism”. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism

WEB APPLICATION

One web application that revolutionizes the internet today is a simple little site called Torrentz. Torrents are files and programs that are uploaded by users onto a website where they are either seeded or leached. Seeding is keeping the downloaded program active for others to download. Leaching is downloading the file and not sharing it with other users. Basically, the more people who seed a file, the faster a file downloads for another user. Torrentz is not an illegal website even though it has a list of downloadable movie still in theatres, pc games complete with crack codes, TV series that haven’t even come out yet BECAUSE it acts as a search engine. You do not virtually download anything from their site, it gives you a list of other sites that have the file available for download—this is how they beat copyright laws.

The sites functionality is pretty straight forward. It has a search engine up top in order to search for the file your are looking for. There are also tabs at the top that allow you to pick your file category. For example, if you wanted to download a TV episode, you would click the TV tab and then search or scroll down and search a list of TV episodes. You can also do searches by keywords. At the top it has a list of the most popular keywords people use, and you can click those in order to narrow down your search even further. The site simply isn’t some small time site. It basically acts like a host site for these illegal downloads. Once you find a file that you like, it will give you a list of different websites to download it from. Torrentz acts as a directory for other websites that have the movie/TV/pc game/ music/video game. From there, you click the file you want (some websites that it directs you too charge users to download from them), it will redirect you to the other website, and then you download and voilà, you have the file. Of course you need to download a special torrent application for the torrent to download at the correct speed such a uTorrent. uTorrent serves as a program that runs on your computer that acts as another pathway for your file to download on.

The site is not set up to be complex. It has a simple white background, with orange highlights for the headers, and blue writing. The whole website is the same. It is very user friendly and easy to use. Its look makes it easy to use in that it is simple and straightforward. As said before, it has a search engine, category and keyword tabs, and even has different sections on the homepage, such as Latest Game Downloads or Latest Movie Downloads. It even has a help page which acts more as a disclaimer to protect the site, and warn people what will happen if they violate proper usage. This simple set up makes the site very easy to use. Finding a file on the internet and downloading the file is very easy thanks to the straightforward, simple design of Torrentz.com.

I cannot say that there is much social interaction on the Torrentz site directly. I know you can add comments to a directory of a file. This serves useful in the fact that some people upload bad files. For example, they upload Ocean’s Thirteen, rename it Max Payne, and tons of people download it. Other times you wait almost 10-12 hours for a file to download, only to find out that it has corrupt files and doesn’t work. This is where the comments come in handy. Users can help direct you to proper working files. You can write whatever you want about the files, and receive feedback from other users.

I find this site useful because I can download any files I want for free. There are thousands of torrent downloading sites, some much more sketchy than others. Torrentz allows me to find working big-name sites that I know I am not going to download a virus from or download a bad file. It is also useful and beneficial because I am saving money. Sure it is illegal to do, but I will take my chances, considering millions of other people are doing this too. I mean, who doesn’t want to save 11 bucks for a movie ticket, or 60 bucks for a new PS3 game (yes, you can download xbox and playstation games), or even spend 100 dollars on one season of a TV series when you can simply download it for free from other users. I think the site is interesting because it acts like a google.com almost. Sure you can find torrents on Google through their search engine, but Torrentz.com is simply just for torrents. You will not find an IMDB movie review if you search for the new movie Wanted with Angelina Jolie, you will only find a list of other websites that you can download the movie from. I find Torrentz.com a very useful and interactive website because it has a search engine to find files, has a special program to download files with, and is clever in the way that they only list other websites that have the movie, in order to protect themselves.

Torrents Search Engine. "Torrentz". 2003-2008. URL: http://www.torrentz.com/

identity - 6

I am part of many online communities, all of which I have a specific identity with. I have an online identity with my bank, with my Facebook, with my AOL instant messenger, with eBay, with BlogSpot, and countless others. I think these are the identities that most people are apart of. The cool thing about all these is that I don’t have to have a username that bears my real name. I cannot even begin to remember all the AIM screenames I had. I remember throughout my earlier years in middle and high school I would have a new screename every two weeks. Eventually I got tired of updating my 4657846578 buddies that I had a new screename and got tired of remembering which screename I used for this site or that site. Finally I stuck with one that I use for every single identity. I have the same password for every single website and the same username/account email address.

The online identity that gives away the most about me is, take a lucky guess…Facebook. Everyone has a Facebook account. Facebook is probably one of the biggest social networks online in the present day. It is a combination of blogging, posting comments, posting pictures, posting information into a public domain. The difference is you can choose what you want to make public or private. If you want only your friends to be able to see your pictures but you want your information to be public, you can do that. Facebook is a combination of IRC, blogs, forums, shopping, and to some extent an email address (inbox and outbox).
This chosen identity of mine establishes a reputation and allows me to contact people in several ways. If you look on my Facebook account, you will learn a lot about me (that is if you friend request me cause my profile is on private). You will find out my cell phone, my apartment number at Sweet Home, my birthday, my screename, etc… Some people like to keep that stuff private but I think its more for girls cause honestly, I don’t care if people know my cell phone or know where I live (no offense to the ladies, but its different for guys and girls to post addresses and private info). Facebook also now recently set up a live chat program. You can now Facebook chat with people who are logged on Facebook, another way to interact. If you read my information and stuff you will get the vibe that I like to go out and party a lot. If people are interested in partying and going out and see my pictures and get a good vibe from them, then they can further initiate a friendship with me. If my reputation is despicable in their eyes, then they can either delete me or just be mutual acquaintance.

I have read other blogs in which people talked about how people took their pictures and created a whole new fake account on some kind of website. I cannot say this has happened to me. This is one way someone can steal your identity. Applications like Facebook can also allow, in the most extreme case, a predator or stalker to take pictures and create a fake account and then find people and deceive them. My Facebook identity was hijacked once by my roommates. A less severe case of someone actually creating a fake account, but one time my roommates jumped on my account and changed my name to “Patty O’Ferncher”. They set my pictures to private and added one picture of a random person they found and set that to public. They changed my information and everything to make me look like some creepy old guy. Sure it was funny to me; I mean, it was a harmless prank that is easily fixable. But over the course of fixing it (as names do not change back immediately), I must have received at least 4 inbox messages from people saying “who the hell is this”. No one commented my page anymore and when I commented people not knowing my pictures were private, I would receive threatening or “stfu” comments back. Eventually everything got fixed, but the fact that my friends created a fake identity for me in a matter of minutes was quite scary, considering other people can do it too.

Judath Donath stated in her opening paragraph, “The virtual world is different. It is composed of information rather than matter. Information spreads and diffuses; there is no law of the conservation of information… One can have, some claim, as many electronic personas as one has time and energy to create.” She brings up valid points when it comes to identity. Applications like Facebook, AIM, and Myspace are programs that allow information to be spread to everyone. My opinion of privacy and identity online is, “if its online, someone can find it.” No matter how private your Facebook page is, or how secure your bank accounts are, people who are smart enough can get access to it. We risk our identities everyday by creating a Facebook account or paying your bills online through your online banking account. Identities are a valuable part of our lives, and the fact that our entire lives can be brought up through a possible google search, or someone can access our cookies and see where we have been, is quite scary in my opinion.

Gift Economies - Midnight Run

Gift economies play a big part in today’s society when it comes to providing goods for the advancement of public good. There are many different organizations and individual people who make up a gift economy. A person who donates money to relief funds in conflict countries is contributing to a gift economy. Toys for Tots or the Salvation Army are organizations that contribute to the gift economy. Scientists and scholars contribute to the gift economy by sharing their work and ideas for other to expand and further advance in that subject. Peter Kollock, in his essay The Economies of Online Cooperation, states that the best example of someone contributing to a gift economy is one who is “a literal altruist – who works for the good of others without any regard to self.” These are hard to find indeed, but the overall point is that those who contribute to gift economies ask for nothing in exchange. A gift economy service that I contribute to is the Midnight Run organization. Do I classify myself as a literal altruist—probably not. But I do consider my contributions to others an example because I do not ask for anything in exchange for my services.

For those of you who don’t know, Midnight Runs are services in which people take items that are donated to a church and distribute them to those who are less fortunate. I am part of the St. Barnabas Episcopalian Church in Ardsley, NY and do these Midnight Runs with my grandfather about 4 times a year. He is very religious man and has always been a stern believer in helping those who aren’t as fortunate as him. My church on Saturday nights twice a month go around New York City distributing food, clothes, bibles, blankets to those who are living on the streets, or are in extreme financial crises. In a blog article titled How to Save the World, Dave Pollard quotes a philosopher named Hyde, who said “Every gift is its own reward, but that reward is multiplied, without limit, when the gift, or any gift, is passed along to others. A story is a gift. Blogs are gifts. Ideas and insights and teaching and counsel are gifts. Conversations are gifts. The Midnight Run service is a prime example of this because aside from giving out donated gifts, we hand out bibles and pamphlets to help enlighten those who have lost faith in the world. We also have small conversations with the homeless people which is a gift of its own because they have no one to talk to. Giving them 30 seconds of small talk makes their day.

Kollock in his article also wrote pertaining to public goods “First, it is to some degree indivisible in that one person's consumption of the good does not reduce the amount available to another.” This applies to the Midnight Run because there are so many other organizations (such as schools, Salvation Armies, synagogues) that participate as well. If my church runs out of clothing and blankets for one night, most likely the next night a different organization will be out on the streets continuing where we left off.

Finally, the Midnight Run can be classified as a gift economy because it helps people build relationships. On their website, they write: “Midnight Runs is dedicated to finding common ground between the housed and the homeless. Midnight Run tries to provide the homeless poor with a few of the bare essentials needed for survival.” Not only do we distribute blankets and clothing to the homeless we find a common ground with them. In an article titled The Gift Economy by Gifford Pinchot, he writes “In a gift economy it is the circulation of the gift(s) within the community that leads to increase—increase in connections, increase in relationship strength.” Clearly the Midnight Run organization does increase connections and relationships with the homeless.

I believe a gift economy is a good thing that gives back to the public. The Midnight Run organization is just one of thousands of examples of contributors to gift economies. I noticed that in most of the articles I read, they didn’t talk much about gift economies not having to be material. In my opinion, a gift economy does not have to be a material item. Contributing to a gift economy can be as simple as shoveling snow off the driveway of your elderly neighbor, or helping someone whose car broke down on the side of the road. Gift economies are becoming increasingly more common in today’s society. The gift economy is “coming back as we enter the information age,” states Pinchot. The current economy is shifting away from the industrial age and starting to focus more on the management of information—information and aid are being distributed to the public through gift economies.

Sources:

Kollock, Peter. (1999).The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace. Retrieved on September 18, 2008, from http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/kollock/papers/economies.htm

Pollard, Dave. (17 April 2005). How to Save the World: The Gift Economy. Retrieved on September 18^th, 2008, from

http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2005/04/17.html

Pinchot, Gifford. (Summer 1995). The Gift Economy. Business on a Small Planet, 49. Retrieved September 18, 2008, from

http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC41/PinchotG.htm

PS - IF ANYONE READING THIS LIVES IN LOWER WESTCHESTER COUNTY (NY) OR IS FROM NEW YORK CITY AND WOULD LIKE TO DO THESE RUNS, PLEASE VISIT THE WEBSITE FOR MORE INFORMATION ON SCHEDULING AND INFORMATION.

The Darknet and Copyright Laws: Which Will Succeed?

I will start off by telling everyone that I can be classified as an internet “pirate.” I commit piracy everyday, whether it’s downloading music straight from the web, or downloading movies that are still in theatres from torrent websites. Do I think it is wrong to do this—absolutely not. In fact, I do not see anything wrong with it. I think copyright is just a societal device to help the rich get richer. I believe piracy is not a serious issue, and laws against it should be reduced in severity.

Copyright laws have been around since the 1600s accompanied with the creation of the printing press. Then the Copyright Clause was implemented into the Constitution in 1787, which gave exclusive selling rights to the creator for a period of time. Then in 1886, a convention known as the Berne Convention began to implement copyright laws between sovereign nations. In 2002, the WIPO Copyright Treaty created even greater restrictions that supported copyright. Why have there been conventions and laws for over 400 years, yet piracy is still an issue in today’s society? I believe it is because there are so many people that support/disagree with copyright laws, it is virtually impossible to come up with a permanent solution.

Everyone complains about how the music industry doesn’t find it fair, or seeing movies before they come out is bad, but when you think about it, who are the people hitting the newspapers still? Brittany Spears and Lil Wayne are still millionaires, and record companies are still promoting CD’s and still making millions as well. Actors like Mel Gibson and Russel Crowe are still driving Mercedes and living in mansions. So what’s all the fuss about? Sure they’re losing some money, but there still making millions of dollars off their music or movies. For example, the Dark Knight within the first 20 days made 400 million dollars. God forbid I downloaded the torrent off the internet and didn’t contribute another 10.75 to that income. A Swedish editor wrote an article in the newspaper Expressen, and in it he wrote, “Those that argue that music should not be downloaded from the internet, doesn’t represent the consumer, presumably.” This quote clearly states that patents and copyright laws are in place primarily for companies to keep gaining income. The company is not looking out for the interest of the consumer, and is looking out mainly for itself.

Further proof of this argument can be seen in this article with the excerpt: “The majority of such development is taking place within large corporations...This means that the question we shall ask, is if the large corporations as a group would commit as much on development should patents and copyright be non-existing. The answer would be – probably, because of competitive reasons.” Once again, the Swedish editor is stating that even without copyright laws, companies would still commit to producing new music and movies and books, primarily to keep gaining income. I completely agree with this author. I think no matter how much we share music through the internet or download movies instead of buying them, companies and artists will still thrive, so why pursue and condemn those who download music or media for free?

The interests of content creators and public good are already being accommodated as well. The creators are still profiting from their work (especially in the music and movie industry which is of biggest concern), and when it comes to the public good, well, that’s what p2p applications and torrents are for. If people want to buy a CD or go pay to see a movie, more power to them. But when it comes to public good and being able to acquire items, that is partly what file sharing is for. In an article titled, “The Darknet and the Future of Content Distribution” authors write, “Today, several popular applications and services offer similar capabilities. CD-writers have become mainstream, and DVD-writers may well follow suit. Hence, even in the absence of network connectivity, the opportunity for low-cost, large-scale file sharing exists.” This quote further proves that public good is already being fulfilled, and that everyone and anyone have access to cheap music and movies. This quote also is saying how CD-writers have become mainstream. Now, if people are so supportive of copyright laws, why do they still make every computer standard with CD or DVD burners? It doesn’t make much sense in my opinion because people use CD/DVD writers to burn music or movies and distribute amongst their social network.

Overall, I believe that copyright laws are not necessary. I believe without copyright laws, companies will still thrive, and media figures will still come out with new work. Piracy has been around for quite some time, and artists still come out with CDs making millions. Actors are still doing new movies everyday that result in millions of dollars of income. Copyright is suppose to protect the creator and support them in making new work, though new pieces of work are coming out everyday, despite how many people are sharing music or movies on the web. I believe copyright may never be annulled, but piracy will continue no matter how strict the laws get.

Sources:
1. Peter Biddle, Paul England, Marcus Peinado, Bryan Willman. (October 2003). The Darknet and the Future of Content Distribution. Levine’s Working Paper Archive.

2. Pettersson, Karl-Henrik. (April 2005). Copyright bad for a modern society. Retrieved September 11th, 2008, from Expressen. Web Site: http://www.p2punite.org/?q=node/17

3. (n.a.). (n.d.). Copyright. Retrieved September 12th, 2008, from Wikipedia. Web Site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

COM 125 Assignment 2: Mosaic Web Browser

If I had to guess, 80% of us once had an America Online account. Do we remember when we were younger browsing the web with our 56k connection? Do you remember Netscape Navigator? Where do you think those browsers came from? Mosaic was a web browser created in January of 1993. Although people had come out with web browsers way before this, Mosaic would eventually prove to be a revolutionary concept, in that it laid down the foundation and success for modern day web browsers.

Marc Andreeson and his partner Eric Bina became intrigued by a web browser known as Viola. They planned to expand on its concept and make a newer web browser with more features. The two worked for the National Center for Supercomputting Applications (NCSA). The first Mosaic was released in April of 1993. Originally, Mosaic was released as a program designed to get information from various public networks. Though over time, it proved to be a program that would change everyday life. Though it was innovative, a few issues resulted in an upgrade and release of Mosaic 2.0 in December of 1993. Mosaic made it easy for people to spread information amongst the world through their program. It also was the first browser to allow images to be displayed in the actual document, rather than being opened in another browser pa

ge. The World Wide Web became extremely globalized with the release of Mosaic.

Gary Wolfe, a writer for Wired magazine wrote the following about Mosaic: “Mosaic is the celebrated graphical "browser" that allows users to travel through the world of electronic information…Mosaic's charming appearance encourages users to load their own documents onto the Net, including color photos, sound bites, video clips, and hypertext "links" to other documents. By following the links [you] can travel through the online world along paths of whim and intuition.” This is a long quote, but a meaningful one. It basically sums up Mosaic in a nutshell. The internet is a system that connects the world and allows people all over to spread information to each other. This is exactly what Mosaic did. It was one of the first browsers to allow people to spread information to each other within seconds. It was one of the first programs to allow people to do this easily. It allowed scholars to spread ideas and scientists to share information; it helped technology advance, and more importantly, helped connect together the world. Below and Above you can see the difference between Viola and Mosaic. Which one looks easier?

CNETnews, in 1994 published an article titled: “Mother of Invention: How the Mosaic Browser Triggered a Digital Revolution.” Once again Mosaic is being praised as a revolutionary program. Mosaic did not add many features to the browser, though it was one of the first browsers that allowed people with intermediate computer skills to access. Its graphics and designs were also appealing to the average user. There are studies done in the mid 1990s that prove that internet use skyrocketed around the same time Mosaic was released.

Still don’t believe that Mosaic was the innovation of web browsing? That program we all use called Internet Explorer, where do you think that came from? In 1995, Microsoft licensed Mosaic for 2 million dollars, modified it, and renamed it Internet Explorer. After a dispute, Microsoft ended up paying Mosaic 8 million dollars for auditing issues. Every Internet Explorer version before 7.0, in the About box, then said “Based on NCSA Mosaic.”

The internet is a fairly new invention, being that it hasn’t been around for a long time. It will most definitely advance in later years into a more powerful, innovative device. There are hundreds of different things that led to the creation of the internet. The internet involves email, browsers, file sharing, satellites, millions of networks worldwide, hypertext, TCP/IP, etc… All these things had a beginning sometime in the past. Though when it comes to recognizing web browsing, Mosaic may not have been the first, but it was the one that became the most popular, and helped lead the world into a digital revolution.

Sources:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_(web_browser)

2. http://news.cnet.com/2009-1032-995679.html

3. http://www.livinginternet.com/w/wi_mosaic.htm