https://invidio.us/watch?v=xdO9SzDd3OU
20 years old, but it doesn’t sound it.
Author: Neil Mather
I made my wiki have a Miller columns view. I like it, I think it works well for wikis.
I think it’s probably something that could be a browsing style option built into the browser, rather than forcing it into an individual website, but hey, it’s not, so here we are. Roll on Xanadu!
I copied most of the code for it from Jethro Kuan’s Cortex Hugo theme (which he says he mostly copied it from azlen.me), and then wrangled it into my org-mode publishing process.
Yes it’s interesting that they focus on privacy. I do agree with the main thrust of the article, that without diligence, and when just focusing on the tech, the decentralised can easily be centralised again. And in some cases the absence of privacy can be the attack vector. But I think I find things like the anti-disintermediation of blogging, email (gmail) and git (github) as more low-hanging examples of what we need to prevent against, where privacy had nothing to do with it.
It’s troubling too to think how this will encroach on more and more transactions, as so many things become are becoming so-called ‘smart’. As Paul says in his Info Civics article, “All authority is borrowed from the server, and so the users possess no authority of their own. As a result we must describe these services as authoritarian.” It’s provocative but I think the same could be applied here.
We have an interview with one of the authors, Aaron Perzanowski, here – https://therestartproject.org/podcast/crisis-copyright/.
That’s great. I hear lots of good things about Obsidian. How did the connection happen? (I’m very interested in constellation formation!)
Desmond Rivet (desmondrivet.com)Interesting. How do you think this would apply to something like a distributed game, where you want a certain kind of enforcement of the rules between players?
I think the argument would be that any enforceable rules would be built in to the protocol itself. Kind of like the idea of smart contracts I guess – certainly not without its own range possible pitfalls, but the idea being that it requires much more consensus to change a protocol.
In thin client/thick server models, the server does all the work and has all the power. Any authority for the user to do something is borrowed from the server (which can also remove it at any point).
The society of users in thick-server applications route their actions through the server. When they message each other, they are updating entries in the server’s database. When they publish files, they are writing those files to the server’s disks. The server has ultimate authority over those systems. Users can access the interfaces provided by the server to control them, but the server may override a user’s choice at any time. All authority is borrowed from the server, and so the users possess no authority of their own. As a result we must describe these services as authoritarian.
Looking good! Are you going to add h-entry markup?
h/t @Aadil
The tethered economy: the move towards products being persistently linked to the seller after purchase. By software and connectivity. Bad news because the vendor has complete control over your use of the thing and how long it lasts.
Imagine a future in which every purchase decision is as complex as choosing a mobile phone. What will ongoing service cost? Is it compatible with other devices you use? Can you move data and applications across devices? Can you switch providers? These are just some of the questions one must consider when a product is “tethered” or persistently linked to the seller.
– The Tethered Economy by Chris Jay Hoofnagle, Aniket Kesari, Aaron Perzanowski…