Let's decentralize first by removing the centralized generic resources that consume too much of the traffic, like Facebook, Wikipedia, Amazon and Google.
How do you propose "removing" Amazon, Wikipedia, et al?
Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
131–140 of 205 posts
Re: Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
#132I've been trying to think about "rethinking" government for quite a while. The idea of a web based governance system seems really appealing, in the sense that I think the greatest strength of the web is how quickly ideas can go from concept to execution. Its about the closest thing to a meritocracy as we've ever come, and that's simply because the gate keeper is thrown away. Think about how many great things have spr…
You, like a whole bunch of the new technocratic futurists, have almost no ability to discern fantasy from reality. What you're talking about is popularly known as science fiction. You should be writing books and not pretending like you know the first thing about politics. The reason why things take so long in reality is because there is a multitude of voices. Reddit does not promote pluralism, rather a giant circle-j…
You offer a lot of piss and vinegar, yet little insight. Please elaborate on "fantasy and reality" and "science fiction" instead of throwing up bombasitc refute. Also, parent post has no mention of Reddit.
What are you actually saying here? IF you're going to barate parent comment, then you're going to have to (at the very least) back it up with a few reasons why his/her system would fail.
Re: Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I agree that TCP/IP is decentralized, unfortunately due to NAT and corporate firewalls, vast swaths of users have been relegated to second class citizens who can only act as data consumers. Unfortunately this same misguided approach to security, or as I call it suckerity, has been carried forward into IPv6. There is some hope that WebRTC and other p2p technologies might alleviate the problem but then the task o…
This is exactly the problem. We need a better transport layer. You know, the speed at which SPDY has caught on has given me hope. Admittedly, that's at the application layer, but I think if Google were to get behind an initiative to create a better TCP, it would actually have a chance at working. Historically, Google's incentives were properly aligned with a decentralized Internet, but Google is more and more a conte…
>You know, the speed at which SPDY has caught on has given me hope. Admittedly, that's at the application layer, but I think if Google were to get behind an initiative to create a better TCP, it would actually have a chance at working.
You might find QUIC interesting (being implemented on chrome):
http://blog.chromium.org/2013/06/experimenting-with-quic.htm...
The "SPDY" application layer its implemented on top of it.. working at UDP.. so in theory, one can implement other sorts of applications layers on top of it..
Re: Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
#134Perfect timing, I just released a tool that enabled a more decentralized web. It used BitTorrent Sync to distribute files and I plan on implementing namecoin or colored coins for name resolution. As soon as an open source, stable btsync clone is released I plan on swapping it in. The biggest drawback is that you can only serve static content, although I think many websites today would be fine with this restriction. Y…
BitTorrent Sync is the wrong foundation for this revolution. It should be open source from top to bottom.
Come on, the guy even mentioned himself in the above post "As soon as an open source, stable btsync clone is released I plan on swapping it in.", what's the point of re-emphasizing that point? He obviously knows the issue with btsync but it's fine to start building something on top of it in the meantime, just as a proof of concept.
Re: Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
#135"The Internet was done so well that most people think of it as a natural resource like the Pacific Ocean, rather than something that was man-made. When was the last time a technology with a scale like that was so error-free? The Web, in comparison, is a joke. The Web was done by amateurs." -- Alan Kay
Re: Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
#136"The Internet was done so well that most people think of it as a natural resource like the Pacific Ocean, rather than something that was man-made. When was the last time a technology with a scale like that was so error-free? The Web, in comparison, is a joke. The Web was done by amateurs. " -- Alan Kay
Re: Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
#137The idea of an open, free and decentralized web created by all for all is one of the main reasons I became a Mozillian. I invite all that think this is a good idea to check out their local Mozilla communities and help carry this mission onwards. You can get guidance on how to get involved with Mozilla by following the instructions and filling the form at http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/contribute/ =)
Funny you say that. If you study history you will learn Mozilla org was big on pushing proprietary non standard compliant extensions. Rise of IE curbed their enthusiasm because roles have changed.
I think it was in one of the interview videos at
https://www.coursera.org/course/insidetheinternet
Re: Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
#138Perfect timing, I just released a tool that enabled a more decentralized web. It used BitTorrent Sync to distribute files and I plan on implementing namecoin or colored coins for name resolution. As soon as an open source, stable btsync clone is released I plan on swapping it in. The biggest drawback is that you can only serve static content, although I think many websites today would be fine with this restriction. Y…
While i love your idea, (and am glad you found the context to show your project off again. i read the original post), i do have two nitpicks.
You said it downloads the entire site when i open a site. Now, this is completely fine for normal text-based blogs, but what if it's an image heavy site? Like theChive? Wouldn't i end up storing several gigabits (possibly terrabytes) of data for that site?
Secondly, if somehow we extend the concept to dynamic content (don't ask me how) wouldn't it effectively mean each of us running a server and hosting it on that?
Maybe your idea can be implemented on the server level instead of the client level... like proxy servers doing what you want the clients to do and thus the content would be all over the internet instead of a few specific servers. (not saying that's a good idea btw)
Re: Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
#139The idea of an open, free and decentralized web created by all for all is one of the main reasons I became a Mozillian. I invite all that think this is a good idea to check out their local Mozilla communities and help carry this mission onwards. You can get guidance on how to get involved with Mozilla by following the instructions and filling the form at http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/contribute/ =)
Funny you say that. If you study history you will learn Mozilla org was big on pushing proprietary non standard compliant extensions. Rise of IE curbed their enthusiasm because roles have changed. I think it was in one of the interview videos at https://www.coursera.org/course/insidetheinternet
If you mean Netscape that was a different group of people at a different time with different goals. Some of those people carried over to the Mozilla project but the goals have always been different.
Re: Tim Berners-Lee: We need to re-decentralise the web
#140Perfect timing, I just released a tool that enabled a more decentralized web. It used BitTorrent Sync to distribute files and I plan on implementing namecoin or colored coins for name resolution. As soon as an open source, stable btsync clone is released I plan on swapping it in. The biggest drawback is that you can only serve static content, although I think many websites today would be fine with this restriction. Y…
No offence intended but it sounds to me like you just reimplemented the freenet protocol sans proxying with namecoin bolted on. Don't get me wrong the use of namecoin sounds like a good idea for this.
I have also been toying with the idea of a serverless XMPP chat client using gnunet for key exchange + namecoin as a dynamic dns. You could use something similar for dynamic content I would think.
I for one interested in looking at your code.