131–140 of 176 posts
The man deserves credit of course for helping create the first browsers and promoting the early web and his work for W3C. However, Tim's track record is not great when it comes to backing new versions of the web. E.g. Semantic Web never happened and arguably this is his latest attempt at flogging that dead horse. So, my prediction is that this won't get very far. It seems the website is a bit hand-wavy on the actual…
"Mostly that never happens. " Might be because there are no decentralized competitors to facebook, who offer the same possibilities bugfree. Never seen that.
Decentralized is an implementation detail for most users that they don't really understand or appreciate.
I do believe there is an opportunity for something new to displace facebook. FB is not a healthy network at this point. It's shrinking and users are disengaging or even afraid to use it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The new Copyright Directive may have that effect though.
? How would that have that effect?
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
People are lazy and don't care. They're happy to let Facebook host and own their data if they can comment and like friends' videos for that. That's basically fine. From what I can learn from the history the web has mostly been centralised and will continue to be so. To think, all business domains tend to converge into few large companies/services, and finally into duopolies and monopolies if left to their own devices…
How do you define "web" and "centralized" here? The internet (not necessarily the world wide web) was created to be decentralized because the US military recognized that having a single point of communication failure was a bad design (http://ccr.sigcomm.org/archive/1995/jan95/ccr-9501-clark.pdf).
In my estimation, the most centralized thing about the internet as we currently know it is the physical infrastructure (which is still not really centralized, but there's a relatively small number of Tier 1 networks connecting everyone else). But the protocols can be implemented over radio if necessary (albeit much more slowly), so even that's not really centralized.
My estimation is that as governments increase regulation of the internet as we know it, more people will move to TOR or something like it (move to the "dark web" if you like) as a way to just do normal internet things without the need for a lawyer. The governments in turn may decide to outlaw that (as in China), but enforcement of that seems infeasible against determined and skilled citizens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would love to 'own' all my data. But companies offering services will win out because they do not have to play nice with you or your data store. Take Gmail, Facebook or Google docs as examples. In principle that's your data. But Gmail has successfully convinced people that Google is able to run its mail service better than you or your corporation ever could. In return for 'reading your mail', and vast amounts of co…
What is going to prevent everyone on Solid from getting constantly hacked by 0-day bugs and all their data read?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Arguably, Linux owning the back end development space so completely is due to developer preference. and why is that possible? it's because the backend is decoupled from where the users are.
Because commercial UNIX companies decided it was cheaper to commoditize UNIX on their hardware than keeping on investing on their own. Linux would hardly be where it is without the help of Intel, IBM, HP, SGI, Hollywood studios, ...
People are lazy and don't care. They're happy to let Facebook host and own their data if they can comment and like friends' videos for that. That's basically fine. From what I can learn from the history the web has mostly been centralised and will continue to be so. To think, all business domains tend to converge into few large companies/services, and finally into duopolies and monopolies if left to their own devices…
>If some guy has to effectively stop hosting a forum because of GDPR GDPR does not prevent people from hosting forums
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If some guy has to effectively stop hosting a forum because of GDPR GDPR does not prevent people from hosting forums
Explicitly no. Though practically that seems to be the effect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
? How would that have that effect?
I'm no expert, but from what I've heard, site owners can be held liable for hosting copyrighted material now. If you're running a site with lots of user generated content, it could be difficult to distinguish what is 100% user made vs copied from somewhere else. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.