281–290 of 295 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It undermines your argument, is what it does. You can talk about it all you want, but as long as you continue to participate in the very thing you rail against, you're going to struggle to be taken seriously.
That's not at all how argumentation works :-) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18886753
Great article Ruben! I've been following Solid's progress for a while, and I think your article very eloquently summarize its purpose and relevance. I'm especially interested in the ability to circumvent the middle-men, and resolve the marketplace chicken-and-egg problem once and for all. Watching your TED talk in 2013 was one of the most influential moment in my life, and discovering the semantic web was perhaps my…
Maybe take a look at FRED? (Disclaimer: not used it myself) - Homepage http://wit.istc.cnr.it/stlab-tools/fred/ - Paper https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280113533_FRED_From... There are likely other projects and papers, google 'text to rdf nlp' Stephen Reed (ex-Cyc engineer) also did some interesting work in this field, in his Texai project, over 10 years ago. Although there are few references to it on the we…
- http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/kbyrne3/docs/thesisfinal.pdf
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'll be surprised to hear that developers like Linked Data. People starting with Linked Data development today are not burdened by the Semantic Web legacy and mistakes of the past. We've been working with front-end devs who have never seen RDF, and never will. They enjoy how Linked Data is able to cross borders and leads to more data than a centralized database could ever give you. The confusion in your comment is…
By RDF did you mean RDF/XML specifically? JSON-LD is still RDF, it's just serialized differently, which is fine, I like RDF, but OP may have more specific concerns than the syntax.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'll be surprised to hear that developers like Linked Data. People starting with Linked Data development today are not burdened by the Semantic Web legacy and mistakes of the past. We've been working with front-end devs who have never seen RDF, and never will. They enjoy how Linked Data is able to cross borders and leads to more data than a centralized database could ever give you. The confusion in your comment is…
The very first paragraph on linkeddata.org says it is for "exposing, sharing, and connecting pieces of data, information, and knowledge on the Semantic Web using URIs and RDF."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You control access permissions too :-)
An application with access to bits in your pod can always copy that data to its own storage right? e.g., a Facebook built on Solid can still grab all the data it needs (with the requisite perms) and store it away, build a profile per WebID, continue serving "cached" copies of changed content, etc. What are your thoughts on this?
The crucial point is that Solid will bring more choice: there will be social feed viewers that will be more invasive, and those that will be less invasive. People can choose the one they like, without consequences as to whom they can interact with. Today, we do not have a choice: if we want to interact with people who use Facebook, we have to use Facebook as well.
Since 2010, no single browser has gained more than two thirds of global market share anymore Pretty sure Chrome did. Or WebKit/Blink family. This is GOOD imho.
Such a centralization comes with the risk of websites only working with one browser, forcing people to chose a certain device, operating system, and browser vendor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The only one I can think of right now would be Font Awesome 5 (via Kickstarter),... And even there, imho Bob (iirc) from the video was right - I hate font awesome 5, and always install either version 4 or "fork awesome" in my projects.
Why so?
I started a reply stating that one can no longer use elements and must instead include svgs, but then I decided to double check - and found I was wrong all this time... Some minor details have changed, but mostly for the better. Their marketing is a bit annoying too, but that's the price of having a sustainable business model.
I obviously haven't checked version 5 in projects yes, but I guess I should now. So thanks for making me realise my mistake...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The internet is already decentralized. Some billionaire can't do anything to fix the situation, at least not directly, because our draconian copyright and network access laws are the only reason that walled gardens are able to exist. The internet doesn't really tolerate serious technical barriers stopping someone from automatically multiplexing the content from various social networks into a single read-write stream,…
The walled gardens exist because the open Internet kind of sucks, really. E-mail is pretty much the last bastion of the old open Internet, and the amount of resources needed to just deal with malicious e-mails is huge. Mindbogglingly huge. And those costs cut out a lot of organizations from being able to operate their own e-mail servers (either the costs of doing it or the costs of verifying to the big players that t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have ever seen any attempt by any volunteer-run FLOSS team to solve nationwide social problems with technology you would know this to be a Lovecraftian nightmare, and not a solution.
But you aren’t legally mandated to use it.
And I can't see how a response of "let's get rid of the chess board so they can't play" would be an adult response to this problem.