Who Really Invented the Internet? Leo L. Beranek, Cambridge, Massachusetts Before Ebay, before Google, before Al Gore, before Tim Bern- universities, by nearby users who would employ those resources ers-Lee – there was a small acoustical consulting fi rm in Cam- to solve every type of problem. His paper in 1960, while at BBN, bridge, MA that put together the team: that designed the system, was an important rung in the ladder that was to establish his name that fabricated the hardware, that wrote the code, that built the as the forefather of the Internet. His summary contains: house of Internet. Men will set the goals, formulate the hypotheses, determine the criteria and perform the evaluations. Computing machines will do the routine work On October 3, 1969, for the fi rst time, two computers at remote that must be done to prepare the way for insights and decisions in technical and scientifi c thinking . Prerequisites for the achievement of an effective, locations ‘spoke’ to each other over the roadbed of the Internet. cooperative association include developments in computer time sharing, in Connected by 350 miles of leased telephone line, the two machines, memory components, in memory organization, in programming languages one at the University of California in Los Angeles and the other at and in input and output equipment. Stanford Research Institute, attempted the simplest of messages: There were, however, twelve years between the founding of BBN the word ‘login’ transmitted one letter at a time. ‘L’ and ‘O’ trans- and Licklider’s insight. Furthermore, the forces that brought BBN mitted perfectly. When the ‘G’ was transmitted, the SRI computer and Licklider together reached back to World War II, when the Psy- crashed. Despite the crash, a major hurdle had been cleared and the cho-Acoustic Laboratory (PAL) and the Electro-Acoustic Laboratory computers had actually managed to convey a meaningful message, (EAL) at Harvard tackled some problems that prevented communi- even if not the one planned; in its own phonetic fashion, the UCLA cation in and from U.S. Air Force aircraft fl ying at high altitudes. computer said ‘ello’ to its compatriot in Stanford. The fi rst, albeit The EAL, under my direction, collaborated closely with PAL, tiny, computer, innovative network was now in operation. where a young scientist named Licklider demonstrated impressive With very little danger of negation, one can assume that the Inter- profi ciency in both physics and psychology. We solved the voice- net is one of the fi ve prodigious inventions of the twentieth century, communication problem by fi nding and developing microphones, rubbing shoulders with television, aircraft, atomic energy and space earphones and amplifi ers with altitude-friendly components and exploration. Unlike several of those, however, it did not have its proving their effectiveness through psycho-acoustic tests. It is ap- beginnings in the nineteenth century. As late as 1940, not even an parent now that the daily closely-wedded cooperation between a imagination like that of Jules Verne could have foreseen how the group of physicists and a group of psychologists that took place at collaboration of physical scientists and psychologists in World War these two separate laboratories was unique in history. II would culminate three decades later in the beginnings of a new At the end of World War II, I migrated to MIT, taking on the title communication revolution. Even the blue-ribbon laboratories of Associate Professor of Communication Engineering and Technical A.T.&T., IBM, GE, and the like, when presented with the prospect Director of the Acoustics Laboratory. With top-fl ight post-doctorates of a group of computers that could speak simultaneously over a hireable, Bolt Beranek and Newman soon expanded its efforts to in- maze of wires, could imagine nothing more than a mechanism that clude research in psychoacoustics. Research support for them was depended on computer-to-computer communication over a single obtained from government agencies for: (1) speech compression; telephone line using central-offi ce switching methods. The vision (2) criteria for prediction of speech intelligibility in noise; (3) the that went further came from a few other institutions and companies effects of noise on sleep; and (4) life sciences. In 1949, I infl uenced and, most important, the individuals working at them the administration of MIT’s Department of Electrical Engineering While one can view the October 1969 transmission as a begin- to appoint Licklider as an Associate Professor to work with me in ning, for those researchers working in communications and arti- the Acoustics Laboratory on voice communication problems. fi cial intelligence in the preceding decades, it was an event with In about 1956, I decided that BBN ought to expand its efforts long and complicated roots. This article will trace those beginnings to include “man-machine systems,” envisioning work on aircraft from their origin in World War II voice-communication laboratories instrument landing systems and machines that would effi ciently and seek to demonstrate how the conceptual leaps of a number amplify human labor. With this goal, I again found it necessary to of gifted individuals, as well as their hard work and production attract new talent. This time, I wanted an outstanding experimental skills, made possible the e-mail you receive each day. As hard as psychologist to head up the activity, preferably one acquainted with it may be to pin down something as nebulous as invention, the the then rudimentary fi eld of digital computers. It is not surprising fi rst network is not hard to identify. The computer in Los Angeles that J. C. R. Licklider became my top candidate for heading such said ‘ello’ to the computer at Stanford via a tiny packet-switched a new division. Of course, a position at BBN would mean that he network called ARPANET, named for the Advanced Research must give up a tenured faculty position. One of the strengths of my Projects Agency in the U.S. Department of Defense. Bolt Beranek discussion was an offer of stock options with the hopeful promise and Newman, ARPANET’s creator and manager for 20 years, that with time they could become an important source of wealth owed its success to several factors – proximity to two renowned for him, which they did. Licklider came aboard BBN in the Spring universities, a dedication to hiring only the best minds and the of 1957 as a Vice President. free-spending-on-research policies of the US Government follow- Licklider had been on board only a few months when he came ing the advent of Sputnik. to me and said that he wanted BBN to buy a computer for him and In 1948, Professors Richard Bolt, Robert Newman, and I, with the his group. I answered that we had a punched-card computer in the blessing of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, formed the fi nancial department and analog computers in the experimental acoustical consulting fi rm, Bolt Beranek and Newman (BBN), then psychology group. He said that they were of no interest to him, he a partnership. Little did we know it at the time, but we were setting wanted a digital computer that used punched paper tapes for its ex- the foundation for the development of the Internet, the genesis ternal memories. ‘What do you have in mind?’ I asked. He said that of which required three conceptual innovations – man-machine he had been negotiating with the Royal-McBee company and they systems or symbiosis, time sharing and packet-switching. Over the would give us a discounted price on their latest computer. “What next fi fteen years, BBN would bring together the minds capable of will it cost?” was my next question. He said, ‘Around $30,000.” I conceiving these three and making them work. said that we had never spent anything approaching that amount In retrospect, the most resonant of the three for the computer- of money on a single research apparatus. “What are you going to literate non-specialist appears to be “man-machine symbiosis,” a do with it?” I queried. “I don’t know, but if BBN is going to be an ground breaking concept articulated largely by J. C. R. Licklider. important company in the future, it must be in computers.” He envisioned access to large computers, then common in major Lick almost fl oored me with the $30,000 answer and no plan for 6 SOUND AND VIBRATION/JANUARY 2007 www.SandV.com using it. But Lick was persis- subject. Lick engaged them as consultants, nearly full-time during tent. He believed we would the summer of 1962. be able to obtain contracts McCarthy and Minsky quickly produced results at BBN, though from the government that McCarthy has made a point of further sharing the credit, as he would make use of a late explained in 1989: “I was promoting time sharing in general. model digital computer, and The person who said that time sharing could be done on a small we did. I concluded that if computer, namely a PDP-1, was Ed Fredkin. I kept arguing with Lick had strong convictions him. I said that an interrupt system was needed. And he said, “We that a computer was the can do that.” Also needed was some kind of swapper. “We can right way to go, and with his do that.” . Basically, Fredkin had done all the work and then already national reputation I supervised Sheldon Boilen in actually implementing that time for doing good research, it sharing system.” was a risk worth taking. My When the time-sharing program was fi nished, the computer partners were apprehensive screen on the PDP-1 was divided into four parts, each part assigned since they did not know to a user.