from the someone-is-wrong-on-the-internet dept.
Mike Masnick over at Techdirt reports that the Huffington Post is running a multi-part story on V.A. Shiva Ayyadurai, the man who invented email. The only problem is, he didn't. And the mainstream media were worried that their standard of journalistic excellence wouldn't be continued in the online world? The tech reporting seems to be of exactly the same quality to me.
I thought this story had ended a few years ago. Back in 2012, we wrote about how the Washington Post and some other big name media outlets were claiming that a guy named V.A. Shiva Ayyadurai had "invented email" in 1978. The problem was that it wasn't even close to true and relied on a number of total misconceptions about email, software and copyright law. Ayyadurai and some of his friends have continued to play up the claim that he "invented" email, but it simply was never true, and it's reaching a level that seems truly bizarre. Ayyadurai may have done some interesting things, but his continued false insistence that he invented email is reaching really questionable levels. And, now it's gone absolutely nutty, with the Huffington Post running a multi-part series (up to five separate articles so far — all done in the past 10 days) all playing up misleading claims saying that Ayyadurai invented email, even though even a basic understanding of the history shows he did not.
Related Stories
Mike Masnick at Techdirt lays out, once again, the evidence rebutting Shiva Ayyadurai's claim to have invented e-mail. Shiva Ayyadurai just settled with Techdirt over his repudiated claims. No money was exchanged in the settlement but Techdirt did agree to publish Ayyadurai's claims side by side with the actual facts for comparison. Ayyadurai rose to international attention a few years ago after he claimed the mantle for himself and went around accusing detractors of racism underwritten by large corporations. Now that the issue is officially settled, Mike Masnick has written another summary.
[...] And with that, we'll (hopefully) leave this saga aside. If Ayyadurai would like to respond to this, or to supply evidence to contradict the points and evidence raised above, he is, as always, welcome to provide it. He could have done so any time since 2012 when we first wrote about him and his claims, rather than taking us to court for two and a half years. I still believe that Ayyadurai should, in fact, be praised for what he accomplished as a teenager -- building a working email system as he apparently did, at the time he did, is no small feat. Our only issue with his claims is the decision to argue that his impressive creation was actually "the invention of email." It was not.
It may take a while for Techdirt to get back on its feet both regarding finances and workflow. The trouble from that particular charlatan cost not only a lot of time but also a fair amount of money. Mike Masnick ended up accepting support from the Koch brothers in order to keep going with writing and reporting, allowing the site to keep going but at the cost of tainting its reputation somewhat. With luck the site can become independent again.
Earlier on SN:
Case Dismissed: Judge Throws Out Shiva Ayyadurai's Defamation Lawsuit Against Techdirt(2017)
The Guy who Claims to have Invented E-Mail is at it Again (2017)
The Guy who Claims he Created EMAIL is at it; Again (2017)
[...]
Huffington Post Shows the Importance Of Fact Checking (2014)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03 2014, @12:32PM
TFS quote shows Masnick is like Dickens - paid by the word.
(Score: 2, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday September 03 2014, @12:41PM
I would have said like NCommander. They both do love to post novels.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Wednesday September 03 2014, @01:24PM
I'm sort of disappointed that it wasn't huffpo alone.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Horse With Stripes on Wednesday September 03 2014, @01:53PM
I've never even considered "journalistic excellence" and "Huffington Post" in the same sentence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03 2014, @04:58PM
Yeah, anyone who thinks huffpo is anything more than infotainment hasn't been paying attention.
It is like complaining that Entertainment Tonight or Dateline has low standards.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday September 03 2014, @05:24PM
I've never considered the Huffington Post period.
Look, its just a liberal hit squad. Why in the name of all that is reasonable would ANYONE waste a single electron on that site?
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03 2014, @07:59PM
At the very least, for the same reason people waste electrons on foxnews.com.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03 2014, @08:18PM
I've blocked both Fox and HuffPo in my hosts file, along with the Daily Fail, Slate, and a few others. My inspiration was Kitten Block [mozilla.org], which rewrites any Daily Mail links to www.teaandkittens.co.uk [teaandkittens.co.uk]. I find myself less angry when clicking Google News links without first having to check where they go, and perhaps better informed for no longer seeing quite as much dreck.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Hairyfeet on Thursday September 04 2014, @12:46AM
Exactly as HuffyPo and FauxNewsuiance are two sides to the same coin and are nothing but propaganda, the only difference is which side is the angel and which is the devil. You look up any of Obama's abuses of power, the wiretaps, the spying, the drone strikes, and you'll be able to find two articles on HuffyPo, one pretending its good when Obama does it and another condemning the Shrub when he did the exact same thing.
This is why i can't be for the left OR the right, because to be in either camp you must have almost a cultish ability to turn off your critical thinking and must have an infinite stomach for hypocrisy. You can't have a rational debate with them either, because its all about which flag they are flying NOT what their actual actions are policies are, its just nuts.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by evilviper on Wednesday September 03 2014, @01:31PM
Does it? How much money did they lose because of their inaccurate story?
None? Well then fact-checking clearly isn't important at all.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday September 03 2014, @01:51PM
The problem is it is not the fault of the Huff post. Ayyadurai is hellbent on claiming to be the inventor email, he even has a website dedicated to fighting for his title of inventor: http://www.inventorofemail.com/ [inventorofemail.com]
(Score: 4, Informative) by opinionated_science on Wednesday September 03 2014, @03:11PM
it would seem that prior art existed...
http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/email.html [nethistory.info]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03 2014, @03:17PM
The thing is it is *their* job to fact check a bit.
Unfortunately most 'news' these days picks an opinion then espouses that opinion as fact. So since they know their own opinions which they consider to be fact they check little. However, it does not matter really as they are typically echo chambers meant to make people think they are getting news. When they are just hearing what they want to hear. So they can sell us... what is called 'modern news' which is little more than thinly veiled advertisement/tracking platforms. Your shampoo may be killing you, find out after the break. According to my no-script it has 22 different outside domain script usages. It also has many outside domains it that are tracking which items you hover over and if you even looked at the page tracking tab clicks.
However, now that they have been called out on it. They have decided they are right and the rest of history is wrong (again opinion presented as fact). By doing their usual hit piece and pulling out random facts and putting them together to tell a different 'narrative'. They have done this for years and use it to good effect in the D vs R debates. They are *very* good at it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deborah-j-nightingale/the-history-of-email-five-myths-about-email_b_5756340.html [huffingtonpost.com]
People are already calling them out in the rebuttal.
It doesnt matter though they can bury the story off the front page. Then bring it up again. Eventually people get tired of correcting them and move on. That way they can get the narrative they really want of 'we found out the secret truth about email'. This in reality is little more than fluff piece. But they have decided to circle the wagons on it. Why? Because they want to be known as a platform of truth. They can rescope the arguments to be that way. When the reality is they are a platform of advertisements. They can use a 'correct' fluff piece to show they are the place to go for 'real' information. It is actually quiet masterful in execution. They may even believe their own kool aid which makes it easier for them to write it. As who doesnt like a group of people all telling each other they are right about something.
This guy put it best about why we allow it to go on. http://www.whattofix.com/blog/archives/2014/03/smart-people-dont-read-the-news.php [whattofix.com]
It is why I dont watch 'the news'. As many times it is little more than to generate arguments which huffingtonpost is exceedingly good at. Part of their narrative as a place to find out things and 'help us pay the bills a bit with this advertisement'.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday September 03 2014, @06:37PM
I can agree with your points, especially this one. I stopped reading newspapers and watching TV news a long time ago. I am not going on a rant but they do more far damage to society than the bad things they supposedly report.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday September 03 2014, @01:40PM
Most of this uproar is because a single man built a better mousetrap while getting credit for inventing the mousetrap itself.
Crediting Ayyadurai as the sole inventor of email is wrong. He just made a better version. From a quick bit of research, Ayyadurai designed a more modern version of email and also the person who coined the term "email". One of his arguments is that before his email system, email as we know it was just text messaging. But that is as asinine argument to make as that is exactly what his email system did, sent text messages.
The big problem is here the use of the term inventor. Using the word Invention is a slippery slope when your invention is a more complex or intricate version of an already existing system. The foundation was laid for email long before Ayyadurai wrote anything. But apparently he did in fact develop the concept of inbox, outbox, drafts, carbon copies and a database to store the messages. So, yea he is the inventor of the modern email system, the term email but not the concept of email itself.
(Score: 5, Informative) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday September 03 2014, @02:06PM
Correction: From further research it looks as if Ayyadurai might not even be the first person to develop any of the concepts of modern email. All he has is a copyright to his program. Ego problems.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by romlok on Wednesday September 03 2014, @04:23PM
Exactly. It's like claiming Bill Gates invented the windowed GUI, because his company has copyright over a product called "Windows".
(Score: 3, Insightful) by evilviper on Wednesday September 03 2014, @05:12PM
All I got is that he might have been the first one to use the "Outbox" concept, while Unix's "mail" command always just used the spool folder, and still does.
He certainly didn't even invent the term "email"... It's just a simple abbreviation of "electronic mail" which was a term long before him, and it strains credulousness that he would be the first one to shorten it, after many years of its common usage.
If you follow the Wired link, Noam Chomsky admits he doesn't know crap about the subject:
Chomsky tells Wired. “I read his documentation, the counterarguments, his responses, and his position seemed to me plausible.”
Hardly the ringing endorsement our super-systems expert Deborah J. makes it out to be.
At this point, I'm going to stop so I can go vomit... This article has all the fairness, expertise, and intellectual honesty of conservative AM talk radio shows, and I feel like I've been deducted IQ points just for having read it.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 2) by evilviper on Wednesday September 03 2014, @05:16PM
Oops... The text from the blockquote to the end was meant for a different comment in this thread.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday September 03 2014, @06:30PM
Noam Chomsky has no business even trying to argue on the side of Ayyadurai. It is just a big name Ayyadurai can toss around to make his argument seem credible.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by SlimmPickens on Wednesday September 03 2014, @08:29PM
I feel like I've been deducted IQ points just for having read it.
I laughed, and then felt sad since it doesn't really seem like an exaggeration.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday September 03 2014, @01:52PM
follow the money. The interesting story is how much money does it cost in agents and PR people to get coverage like that, vs the expected reward of ... patent lawsuits or what?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03 2014, @05:02PM
Breaking News: The Suit is Back! [paulgraham.com]
I'm too lazy to even go read the techdirt article, much less the huffpo article. But I'm assuming the press hit is in service of something else the guy is pushing. I saw the guy on some other fluff-based infotainment show a few months back with the same hype too.
(Score: 2) by PapayaSF on Wednesday September 03 2014, @05:19PM
At least part of the "money" is that this is prime linkbait for the Huffington Post: they can print something provocative, even if it's wrong, and get clicks. The bonus is that it fits the HuffPo's leftist ideology: they can claim someone non-white has been written out of history by racist Americans. I've already seen one rant on Craigslist about how white people "stole" email.
(Score: 5, Informative) by stormwyrm on Wednesday September 03 2014, @01:55PM
The first known email program as we understand it was the CTSS email program in 1965, probably when that guy was a year old. ARPANET sent its first email in 1971, and RFC 561 which is the first of the RFCs that eventually became SMTP, dates to 1973.
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 2) by evilviper on Wednesday September 03 2014, @05:14PM
You hear that? The Unix "mail" command is apparently the most complicated piece of software invented by mankind, and a secretary could NEVER hope to figure out how to use it...
I might disagree with her assertion, but...
...she knows "systems". I guess her vague "systems" knowledge somehow makes her able to infallibly recognize facts about any types of "systems" without actually being an expert on the specific relevant subject.
If you follow the Wired link, Noam Chomsky admits he doesn't know crap about the subject:
Chomsky tells Wired. “I read his documentation, the counterarguments, his responses, and his position seemed to me plausible.”
Hardly the ringing endorsement our super-systems expert Deborah J. makes it out to be.
At this point, I'm going to stop so I can go vomit... This article has all the fairness, expertise, and intellectual honesty of conservative AM talk radio shows, and I feel like I've been deducted IQ points just for having read it.
Hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 04 2014, @08:06AM
And even if this were true, and I doubt that it is, that doesn't change the fact that SNDMSG (which I presume was one of the mail programs on MIT's CTSS back in 1965) is still a true email program, which obviously pre-dates that guy's work by thirteen years. No, Mr. Ayyadurai, you did not invent email. People at MIT were doing it since when you were literally in your nappies.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03 2014, @05:28PM
...first people deny it is true; then they deny it is important; finally they credit the wrong person.”
― Alexander von Humboldt
(Score: 1) by Username on Thursday September 04 2014, @02:00AM
It’s not like huffingtonpost had any credibility to begin with. Most of their articles are just click bait "you wouldn’t believe" etc type stuff.