Tim Berners-Lee
Surfing the
Web in a Dakar slum is a rare luxury on the African continent, where only 3.5 inhabitants
out of 1,000 have access to the Internet, compared with 14.1 in Asia, 88 in Europe,
160.3 in the Americas and 224.5 in Oceania, according to the International Telecommunications
Union.
No, it wasn’t
a love message… Only greater product diversity will build up resistance to virus
attacks, says Lee.
|
Citizen Tim
In a field churning out dot.com
millionaires every other week, Tim Berners-Lee stands in a league apart. The London-born
and raised Berners-Lee could easily have become one of the world’s wealthiest men
by commercializing his invention. Instead, he chose to focus his efforts on improving
and universalizing the Web.
A physics graduate from Oxford University, Berners-Lee started working for the Geneva-based
CERN (European Particle Physics Laboratory) in 1980 where he wrote a programme called
Enquire that could store and recall information based on random associations. That
set the tone for the future development of the World Wide Web, which he invented
in late 1990.
Berners-Lee wrote the HTML (HyperText Markup Language) establishing links with other
documents in a computer and designed an addressing scheme that gave each web page
a unique location, or URL (Universal Resource Locator). Then he developed a set of
rules called HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) for transferring information across
the Net. In 1991, he made the programmes freely available for Internet users across
the globe. For the next two years, he continued working on improving the design of
the Web with feedback from Internet users.
After leaving CERN in 1994, Berners-Lee headed for the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology’s (MIT) Laboratory for Computer Sciences in Boston, where he is director
of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). The organization, which is comprised by more
than 300 members from the global industry including giants like Microsoft and IBM,
sets technical standards for the Web.
Hailed by Time magazine as one of the 100 greatest minds of the 20th century, the
45-year-old Berners-Lee remains a paragon of modesty despite the astonishing growth
and success of his invention. Sitting in his office at the W3C, he asserts that the
Web is just in its infancy. ‘‘The ultimate goal is to support and improve our web-like
existence in the world,’’ he says, explaining that the Web offers an unprecedented
means to achieve greater freedom and social growth. “We are a still a long way from
realizing its full potential.”
• For
more information:
Weaving the Web: The Past, Present and Future of the World Wide Web by its Inventor,
Tim Berners-Lee with Mark Fischetti, (Orion Business Books, 1999).
• Useful Web sites:
www.w3.org
www.cern.ch/cern
|
|
The Net and the
Web
As Berners-Lee puts it, the
Web could not exist without the Net. First developed for military purposes by the
U.S. Department of Defence in the 1960s, the Internet is a network of networks. It
refers to millions of computers around the world connected to each other by telephone
wire, cable and satellite. The Web, a part of the Internet,
is a worldwide collection of text and multimedia files linked to each other via a
system of hypertext documents. The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (http) was created
by Berners-Lee in 1990 at CERN, the European Particle Physics Laboratory, as a means
of sharing scientific data internationally, instantly and inexpensively. With hypertext,
a word or phrase can contain a link to another text. To achieve this, Berners-Lee
developed a programming language called HTML, which allows users to easily link to
other pages or network services on the Web.
|
|
How do you account
for the Web’s formidable growth in the last 10 years?
The Web initially spread because of existing Internet infrastructure set up during
the 1970s. By the time I had the idea for the Web at the end of the 80s, computers
in many universities and institutes in the United States and in Europe were already
connected to each other by cables exchanging information. So you have to give credit
to those pioneers who put together such a network before the Web’s arrival.
The Web spread fast because it was decentralized and no one was controlling its growth.
The fact that anybody can start a server or run a browser, without having to register
with any central authority, is what allowed it to grow rapidly. There were enthusiasts
all over the world who realized what the world could be with the Web and directed
their efforts at developing it.
Also the Web’s openness is a powerful attraction. Everyone can not only read what’s
on the Web but can also contribute to it. Everybody is in a sense equal. This sense
of boundless opportunity also led to its remarkable growth.
Does the Web stand to benefit those traditionally on the margins of technological
innovation?
It is obvious that the present imbalance in society is unhealthy for the whole
world. But do not look to innovations alone for solving global issues. It is for
people to make decisions on how to manage themselves and it requires a lot of effort
on all sides to solve various problems. We’ve had many tools in the past and Internet
can be another tool in addressing those challenges.
The basic idea of the Web is that it is an information space through which people
can communicate, but communicate in a special way, by sharing their knowledge in
a pool. The Web is more of a social creation than a technical one. It has not changed
anything fundamentally in the way human beings think, read and communicate with each
other. It has given people greater choice than ever before by simply providing information.
Advantages of the Web range from enhanced collaboration between people in different
countries to reading a newspaper sitting in a remote village.
Though the Web has given us many choices, we still don’t know how to use those choices
to our advantage. I hope the fact that each individual has more choice now will give
us greater power to reformulate our society.
In your book Weaving the Web, you talk about the danger of the Web being controlled
by a select group of companies or commercial deeds blocking its growth. What would
the consequences be?
The danger is when large companies that sell computers and software effectively
start to control what information you receive on the Internet. Companies which offer
free computers or Web browsers could prevent a user from utilizing or accessing programmes
of their commercial competitors. Even Internet Service Providers (ISPs) can have
commercial deals with certain Web sites, making them easier to access than other
sites. This is already starting to happen.
On the one hand, people feel it’s reasonable for a company to influence your Internet
access if they provide you with free computers and software programmes. But on the
other, it’s really important that the right of the individual to access unbiased
information be upheld. The point is that one should not masquerade the other.
I’m not sure to what extent people realize or can measure whether their attempts
to access different websites are being affected by commercial concerns. It’s also
very difficult to find a balance between the right of a company to offer a service
which is subsidized and the right of somebody to have unbiased access. We have yet
to find a good social arrangement
Another danger is that if a company establishes a monopoly, it will start making
arbitrary changes to universally accepted Web standards. This would force competitors
to concentrate their efforts on matching these rather than coming out with new, bright
ideas to improve the product. This would affect the Web’s overall development.
The Web has allowed a much greater flow of information which some countries are seeking
to regulate and control. How do you react to this?
I know that some countries are contemplating or attempting to control information
available to individuals on the Internet. My feeling is that it is very difficult
to achieve because the Internet allows information to flow in many different ways.
You are only a small hole in this vast system. In a way, controlling or regulating
information is bad for the relationship between a government and the people and,
in the long term, for the stability of the country.
There have also been calls for widespread censorship on the net. But in most of the
Western world, censorship is a derogatory term for one body trying to control what
information another body has access to. However, there is a growing recognition that
parents have the right and the duty to protect their children from viewing undesirable
sites. This led our Web Consortium to develop systems like the Platform for Internet
Content Selection (PICS) that enables adults to control children’s access to different
websites.
The large number of filtering software tools on the market are more effective than
government censorship. A nation’s laws can restrict content only in that country
but filters can block content no matter where it comes from on the Web. Fundamentally,
it is for the people to determine the type of social mechanisms and regulations that
will benefit society.
There have been rising concerns over surfers’ privacy. How is this being tackled?
Privacy involves the ability of each person to dictate what can and cannot be
done with his or her own personal information. For consumers using the Internet,
the greatest privacy concern is that after they’ve ordered a number of products,
companies will have accumulated enough personal information to harm or take advantage
of them. With consequences ranging from junk mail to the denial of health insurance,
the problem is serious.
Users should be aware of how various websites use their personal information. In
a way, privacy concerns are a leading impediment to the further growth of Web-based
commerce, but I think sites should highlight the need for consumer privacy. With
these concerns in mind, our Consortium has developed a new tool called P3P (Platform
for Privacy Preferences Project). It would automatically communicate to users a website’s
stated privacy policy and compare it with the user’s own pre-set policy preferences.
If a Web site’s privacy policy does not suit the user’s interests, they can stop
then and there.
A responsible website should have a privacy policy at the bottom of the home page.
Failing that, I believe there ought to be a legally enforced default policy that
offers individuals the highest protection. The issue of privacy has been addressed
to a certain extent in Europe where companies have to keep secure the information
they hold on customers, and are barred from combining databases in ways that are
legal in the United States. Many people in the U.S. are starting to realize the need
for more regulation of privacy and the need for greater protection of the individual
and society.
There has been a spurt of Internet-related patents in recent years. What effect are
these having on the Web’s development?
The awarding of Internet-related patents poses a danger to the Web’s universality
and can kill good ideas. There was a widely held assumption in the Web’s first five
years that a common good was to be gained from putting together a far-reaching infrastructure.
Now a huge amount of business is being done on the Web. The ability to control any
part of it through patent claims will be very lucrative. In some cases businesses
may be able to gain money simply by threatening to take legal action. This has a
dampening effect on people working together to create a universal Web.
For example, people in the WWW profession meet often to discuss technological improvements
and innovations, from improved graphic or video conferencing systems to ways of wiring
the developing world. These projects have the potential to benefit many people but
are sometimes suddenly abandoned because of fears or rumours of legal action from
a company having patent claims to that technology. Currently, in the U.S. (unlike
in many other countries), it is possible to patent part of the way a programme does
something.
Some of the recent Internet-related patent awards have been derided by the Web community.
They are effectively restricting the use of technologies that could expand the use
and universality of the Internet. I hope that very soon patents will only be considered
valid if they represent a real novelty or a really bright idea. I have yet to see
a patent like this in the field.
There is no way to judge the authenticity or reliability of information on the Web,
making users highly vulnerable. Is this likely to change?
We are not using all the technology available to verify the authenticity of a
website or a person you come across. More advanced tools will soon be introduced.
With the help of new browsers and by using digital signatures, you will soon be able
to actually ensure that the document or the website you are referring to was in fact
generated by its claimed author. With regard to electronic messages, new and secure
communication protocols allow us to make sure that nobody can sneak in and alter
a message along its way.
Now the question is how do you know whether a particular document or person you come
across while surfing on the net is reliable. You just can’t do that. There is no
infrastructure set up at the moment by which you can actually check the reliability
of a person or of a site you are visiting. Why should you believe in somebody about
whom you have never heard of? I think people will have to learn whom they can trust
on the Web.
Take a book for example. You read it because it was referred to you by reliable sources.
In the same way somebody you know may point to a web site. Trust is always transferred
from one individual to another. We have to set up a “Web of trust.”
Some people initially thought of the Web as an anonymous space separated from reality
in which there was no individual responsibility. This is not the case. Anyone who
sends a fraudulent message is sitting somewhere and is naturally subjected to local
laws. If someone makes forged transactions, the fact that they did it electronically
doesn’t in anyway absolve them of their responsibility under the law.
Thanks to the Web, the world has become a global village. But we have recently witnessed
a rising incidence of hackers paralyzing public utility systems with viruses. Can
systems become more resilient?
While the Internet is a decentralized system, I think the principle danger it
faces now is the lack of diversity in the tools we use to access it. If you analyze
the recent virus attacks, you’ll find it’s computers running the same software produced
by the same company that are usually coming under attack by hackers. While it’s advantageous
to have many people running the same software, there is a need for alternative types
of products in order to build up resistance to virus attacks.
There have been proposals that Internet users in developed countries be taxed in
order to wire the rest of the world?
I do think that the developed world owes a great debt to the developing one and
Internet access adds one line to that debt. However, it is not obvious whether taxing
all Internet users in general is a smart idea. It has to be done on a selective basis.
I feel that those who can afford large amounts of Internet access—those for instance
who are in position to get videos-on-demand or use the Web extensively for commercial
purposes—can be taxed.
One could also argue that introducing a tax might discourage some countries from
investing in the Internet, which is developing so rapidly right now. The only place
where you could give serious thought to a tax is the U.S., and perhaps Finland. Other
developed countries, which are trying to catch up with the U.S., may be a bit reluctant
to introduce taxation.
It is still difficult to get an Internet connection in the South because of the lack
of telephone lines. Are there solutions to this?
Telecommunications departments in many developing countries are still bureaucratic
and would never agree to sharing anything with anybody or to allow any competition
that would improve access. One option is to rethink the technology altogether. We
should start off by expanding the use of wireless technologies for basic communications
in rural areas. Once networks have been built up, walkie-talkies could eventually
be merged with the Internet without any input from telecommunication ministries.
The system would be a decentralized one in which there would be no need to apply
for an Internet address or a domain name. Research is already going on in this field
and I strongly feel that commercial production of this technology should start soon
to expand Internet access in Southern countries.
However, it may be difficult for this technology to be deployed in some countries
because it would threaten the existing monopoly of telecommunication companies or
government control over communications. The United Nations could play a role in spreading
the idea among its member States as this technology offers very exciting possibilities.
I also think subsidies should be put towards translating information on the Internet
into different languages. It is important that the Web support local cultures and
not just broadcast American culture. Even in European countries, it was difficult
for the Web to get started because you didn’t have a huge monoculture or monolingual
audience waiting everywhere. Getting over this barrier in countries with smaller
linguistic audiences will be very difficult.
Could you elaborate on the “Semantic Web” you are working on at the moment?
My dream for the Web has two parts. In the first, I see the Web becoming a much
more powerful means for collaboration among people. In the second, collaborations
extend to computers. Machines become capable of analyzing all the data on the Web
— the contents, links and transactions between people and computers.
The Semantic Web would be able to take information from different databases on the
Web, from catalogues and weather sites to stock price information, and to allow this
data to be processed by computers. At the moment, this cannot be done because the
data available on the Web is not in a form that can be understood or converted by
computers for direct analysis. This is because the Web pages are designed only for
human readership.
The Semantic Web would also answer many people’s prayers for a logical search engine
that gives you solid results. Right now, search engines come up with thousands of
Web pages in response to a request. It is impossible to search what’s in all those
pages. With the Semantic Web, the search engine would go out and say “Well, here
is an object which I can mathematically prove to you matches the criteria requested.”
In short, search engines will become more meaningful and effective. Once the two-part
dream is achieved, the Web will be a place where the whim of a human being and the
reasoning of a machine will co-exist in an ideal, powerful mixture.
|
