The Internet versus the Internet

We are often told that private companies won’t invest money into certain technologies, such as “green” energy, because it isn’t economically feasible. Government, the argument goes, must “invest” money for the research that will allow these technologies to become profitable. And as evidence, the advocates of subsidies to “green” energy companies point to the Internet.

The Internet would not exist today without the government’s involvement during the 1970s and 1980s. Government investment in “green” energy might produce the same life enhancing values as the Internet. Or so goes the argument.

As is often the case, this argument drops context. The Internet today is nothing like the Internet “created” by the government.

When the Internet was first developed, it was a text only environment. It was developed to allow researchers funded by the government to share information and computing resources. Personal computers were expensive, limited in their capabilities, and owned by few Americans.

It is true that private companies did not develop the Internet. There was no reason for private companies to do so. However, as the potential of the Internet became more evident, private companies sought ways to develop its capacity and capabilities. But until the early 1990s, something stood in their way—it was illegal for private companies to connect to the Internet.

When the prohibition on commercial activities on the Internet was lifted, private companies began to invest billions of dollars in the infrastructure that makes up the Internet today. The Internet today is nothing like the Internet that was controlled by the government. The difference is as stark as that between today’s smart phones and the rotary dial phones of fifty years ago.

The investments in the Internet belie the claim that private companies won’t invest in promising technologies. They do and they will. They just need to be free to do so. And that includes deciding what they believe is promising.

Similar Posts

  • Adverse Possession

    A little-known aspect of property rights is the concept of adverse possession, sometimes called squatters rights. Founded in common law, the concept holds that a non-owner of property may acquire ownership of that property after use or possession for a specified amount of time. NPR reports of a recent case involving adverse possession. For many…

  • Woman of Color

    This is a guest post by JP Miller In late January we witnessed a brazen low point in the history of the United States. President Joseph Biden announced the retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer from the Supreme Court. He would be examining candidates with the best minds, the highest moral character and best records of…

  • They Don’t Like the Business

    In recent years, city governments have increasingly turned to a process called amortization to allegedly stimulate development and economic growth. However, given the fact that amortization necessarily destroys existing businesses, that claim is a mere pretense. In truth, amortization is a declaration by city officials that they don’t like the business. Amortization occurs when a…

  • Abbott’s Consistency

    Like most of the nation’s governors, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott declared a state of emergency when the pandemic first started. He then promptly shut down much of the state’s economy in an effort to stop the spread of the coronavirus. A year later, Abbott was one of the first governors to remove mask mandates and…