91–100 of 122 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are not understanding the issue here. Nobody is saying that tech companies ain't doing bad things. Let's stop this argument, as we're are not having the same argument.
OK, So you have no examples then. Good.
I think this is a good idea and I think making it easy for people to host their own services is valuable. [0] It’s also been tried a few times with little success (sandstorm.io). I think the problem is deeper, modern infrastructure is messy to run, it’s hard to configure, and every thing has to be specifically tweaked to work. Something that works for regular users will require extensive tooling to be useful and will…
Oh god no. Urbit is not less complex or easier. It's piling on all kinds of extra superfluous nonsense in service of an ideological project, not for technical reasons.
Somehow I feel that accusations of being ideological come from people, who themselves are ideologically oposed to Yarvins work and fail to consider Urbits network protocol purely for its properties. Idea of giving network addresses value, cryptographic ownership and creating a hierarchy of addresses resembling functionality on the network (users, ISPs, etc.) seems perfectly resonable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If this was a mistake and they have changed their mind, sure. If not, (even when warned) it shows they don't have any principles, You won't catch Richard Stallman or anyone rightfully for privacy rights at such an event would you? I would definitely be suspect and would actively call out privacy conferences being hosted and invited by surveillance capitalists.
Quick, let's drop every open source project that had any kind of contribution from Google because every thing done by a trillion-dollar company does is evil and mere relationship with them implies you are compromised.
But it goes for anything really. Writing a technical blog? post on Medium or on dev.to or whatever is hyped right now to get traction.
This is the real problem here.
[0] https://snir.dev
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh god no. Urbit is not less complex or easier. It's piling on all kinds of extra superfluous nonsense in service of an ideological project, not for technical reasons.
Urbit stack is ~30k lines of code, that's low enough to be grasped by a single person. What's hard is learning form scratch completely new platform, but that's deliberate and is not such a problem if it manages to deliver what it promises. Somehow I feel that accusations of being ideological come from people, who themselves are ideologically oposed to Yarvins work and fail to consider Urbits network protocol purely f…
> the core of the whole system (the Nock language) has "loobeans" instead of booleans in which 1 represents false and 0 represents true at which point I nope'd out pretty hard.
>> Being contrarian is not the same as being clever, and this is very much not clever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I have never met or heard of a drug dealer calling their customers for users. I've never met one calling them customers or clients either, I don't know that they had any term for them.
>I've never met one calling them customers or clients I didn't wrote that they did. Please read my comment again.
I'm generally on board with the sentiment, but some of this rhetoric is a bit much, even for me. > The Big Web has “users” – a term Silicon Valley has borrowed from drug dealers to describe the people they addict to their services and exploit. Come on now, "user" as in "computer user" was a term in use since long before the web.
>The mass surveillance and factory farming of human beings on a global scale is the business model of people farmers like Facebook and Google. It is the primary driver of the socioeconomic system we call surveillance capitalism.
This puts me off right away. I probably partially agree, but this kind of simplistic resentment is just a turn-off for the service.
I'm generally on board with the sentiment, but some of this rhetoric is a bit much, even for me. > The Big Web has “users” – a term Silicon Valley has borrowed from drug dealers to describe the people they addict to their services and exploit. Come on now, "user" as in "computer user" was a term in use since long before the web.
> Come on now, "user" as in "computer user" was a term in use since long before the web. The "computer user" term was true back then, but I am on board with Aral's definition. But now in today's world, those "computer users" are: + Addicted to social media whilst those companies control information and spread fake news. + Continuously pay for products like Netflix, YouTube and Amazon whilst those companies continue t…
> Having companies spying on them and implementing dark UX patterns by A/B testing; all for sake of keeping you 'hooked' onto their products.
This applies to all commercial products.
In the era of 5G, massive storage and incredibly powerful CPUs, we really should be exploring the home server space, as it has scope for huge improvements in terms of enabling non-technical people to own their data and operate 'servers'. This would actually realise the dream of a distributed network of full-fledged peers and also put tremendous power in the hands of ordinary people.
I am not sure non-technical people have any desire to "operate 'servers'". Not sure about their desire to own data, either…
For example you could host your own mail server for personal email but almost nobody does that. It's a lot of work and you can get better server for free.