Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Call for a Better Web

callforabetterweb.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 68 posts

Re: Call for a Better Web

#41

Post by markup »

lo_fye wrote: post #38

Good God, man, have you gone looney? You say the internet is broken because authentication is a pain? You say there should be just one social network? Try telling that to the people making boatloads of cash today. The internet IS democracy. You can't tell it what it should and shouldn't do, or how it should or shouldn't be. It gets to decide that on its own. The solution is kinda simple. Don't try to control the inte…

You say the internet is broken because authentication is a pain? You say there should be just one social network?

I didn't say the Internet is broken because authentication is a pain. I said the Web has been created to deal (and access) hypertexts. Nowadays the WWW is used for much more. People use it to shop, keep contacts with friends living far away, some use it to share their "lives" and the current state of art is far from being functional to the scope. To my personal point of view, it is broken by design when it comes to these scopes. And far from me trying to say there should be just a social network.

The gateway I idealize is not a giant bucket (or a silo) you'd fill with your stuff, that's exactly what I want to avoid. The "gateway" would just be a place you use to authenticate and authorize apps to access subsets of your data. Some of it (anagraphical data for the most part) would be stored on the gateway, and other stuff would be in much more appropiate places. Flickr, Twitter, Blogger, Facebook, et cetera. The model I idealize would be a common layer to build thing on, nothing more and nothing less.

Re: Call for a Better Web

#43

Post by al3x »

A little proofreading and peer review would have gone a long way.

We do, eventually, need different models of sharing identity and personal data on the web, but this is fairly incoherent.

Re: Call for a Better Web

#45

Post by gnaritas »

volida wrote: post #32
jnorthrop wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Sigh...where to start?" I wish you wouldn't have started off with that. It's insulting and doesn't add to the discussion. Just because you see the author's conclusions as somewhat naive (which you've articulated) doesn't make it OK to belittle his effort. FWIW, Other than that snide start it's a thoughtful post.

now it's offending because people say "sigh"?

What do you mean now? That's always been insulting, even in person.

Re: Call for a Better Web

#46

Post by markup »

al3x wrote: post #43

A little proofreading and peer review would have gone a long way. We do, eventually, need different models of sharing identity and personal data on the web, but this is fairly incoherent.

I can't really imagine a better peer review other than hacker news to be honest. However I wish I'd got a more replies when I tried to get skilled people to read this (expecially from the english mothertongue), but that didn't happen.

Re: Call for a Better Web

#47

Post by aandarian »

what about the moneyz. I believe that until the financial pipelines are laid out for this connected scenario, there will not be enough incentive for the big companies to cooperate over this "problem." So many referral fees, affiliate fees, and more to cut up. If data is what commands my 2-3x multiple, why would i give it away unless i know i can get a guaranteed 15%+ roi through giving it away.

Lastly, for problems 1-5 - FACEBOOK! No brainer that they will charge for FB connect soon.

Re: Call for a Better Web

#48

Post by Quiark »

patio11 wrote: post #4

Hiya. Mind if I make some suggestions on how you can write better in professional communications? Lead with your strengths. Your first paragraph, which is the most important one you will write because it is the one that determines whether the rest of your piece gets read, is filled with self-inflicted strikes against you. English is not my mother tongue and I’m not a great writer, so I am borrowing the words JFK used…

The Internet as we know it is broken. Dozens of accounts per user -- broken! Web services that can't speak to each other -- broken! Our lives and friends scattered over a hundred web sites -- broken! Our identities owned by service providers -- broken!

But be careful not to overdo it with this marketing gibberish. Some geeks can be allergic to it.

Re: Call for a Better Web

#49

Post by omouse »

jnorthrop wrote: post #26
ryanwaggoner wrote: post #5

Sigh...where to start? First, I applaud your passion for making the web a better place, and for being willing to put yourself out there and be open with your views. That said, there's a number of problems with what you're saying and the proposed solution, but let me point out just a few: 1. Normal people don't care. Seriously, my mom uses a handful of websites and doesn't really care about any of the problems you men…

"Sigh...where to start?" I wish you wouldn't have started off with that. It's insulting and doesn't add to the discussion. Just because you see the author's conclusions as somewhat naive (which you've articulated) doesn't make it OK to belittle his effort. FWIW, Other than that snide start it's a thoughtful post.

SIGH...where to start?

You're barely contributing to the conversation here. The world isn't lovey-dovey. If you can't take the heat, get outta the kitchen.

Re: Call for a Better Web

#50

Post by pg »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #34
pg wrote: post #12

I'd like to remind everyone of a rule related to this: please don't submit your YC application to HN. The reason is simply that if everyone did this, they'd drown out the ordinary content: if you divide the number of applications we get by the number of days between now and Oct 26, the result is many per day. I left this one alive because it's arguably just over the line. It's really more of an essay that mentions th…

Is that the only reason? If so, would it be possible to offer a public place to view apps that was separate from the main page? Judging by the popularity of the "review my startup" posts, I bet tons of people would be interested in reading them.

Honestly, I don't know. That problem was bad enough that I didn't think further about what other bad (or good) consequences there might be of letting people make applications public.

My gut tells me it would be a bad idea. I sure wouldn't have done it as a founder, and if only lame groups did this, there would be no upside, only downside. But I could be wrong; I haven't thought more about it than what I just wrote.

Post reply on HN