Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
1–10 of 15 posts
Re: Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
#2The only party interested in making this happen is the user.
Given the fact that:
a) until today, the commercial service/app/device/app store providers have always had all the market power (and it has gotten even worse), and
b) lots of users currently still don't seem to care about privacy,
how do you see that concept gaining serious ground?
EDIT: (other than for niche situations like human rights activists, journalists, whistleblowers, etc.)
Re: Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
#3Not loading for me.
Re: Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
#4serious question: how does this work for something like Facebook? Things like Facebook and Twitter don't work well in a decentralised fashion (Does Lady Gaga need to be able to deal with 4 million concurrent connections for all her followers?).
Re: Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
#5serious question: how does this work for something like Facebook? Things like Facebook and Twitter don't work well in a decentralised fashion (Does Lady Gaga need to be able to deal with 4 million concurrent connections for all her followers?).
From reading it appears that the basic concept is:
1) Web app inside user browser (unhosted app seems to be defined as an app that runs in the browser, client side)
2) Web app communicates with a 'personal server', basically a server that handles that and only that users data
3) 'personal server' is the thing that brokers connections with the outside world, but doesn't have to interact with a browser app if it isn't required to.
4) Here comes the bit that's actually hard and it gets a bit low on detail:
"There are situations where going through a third party is unavoidable, for instance if a certain guitar dealer only sells on eBay, or a certain friend of yours only posts on Facebook. For each of these "worlds", we will develop application-agnostic gateway modules that we can add to our personal server. Usually this will require having a "puppet" account in that world, which this gateway module can control. Sometimes, it is necessary to use an API key before your personal server can connect to control your "puppet", but these are usually easy to obtain. To the people in each world, your puppet will look just like any other user account in there. But the gateway module on your personal server allows unhosted web apps to control it, and to "see" what it sees.
Re: Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
#6serious question: how does this work for something like Facebook? Things like Facebook and Twitter don't work well in a decentralised fashion (Does Lady Gaga need to be able to deal with 4 million concurrent connections for all her followers?).
They would work but they are more difficult to build. Unfortunately noone has an incentive to put the amount of resources towards public infrastructure that Facebook & co do, therefore it stays centralized.
Re: Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
#7Not loading for me.
It probably unhosted itself.
Re: Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
#8Not loading for me.
Re: Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
#9Reminds me of project Diaspora.
Re: Unhosted web apps: freedom from web 2.0's monopoly platforms
#10serious question: how does this work for something like Facebook? Things like Facebook and Twitter don't work well in a decentralised fashion (Does Lady Gaga need to be able to deal with 4 million concurrent connections for all her followers?).
An email server doesn't need concurrent connections to every possible recipient.