5 ms·

The GPL was a massive legal jujitsu that changed software forever. We need the equivalent with a business model. The biggest challenge isn't the technical plum

by ozten 9y ago

The GPL was a massive legal jujitsu that changed software forever. We need the equivalent with a business model. The biggest challenge isn't the technical plumbing, it's changing how companies operate and changing customers behavior. What is the business model? Why would the next unicorn give up this advantage? Business want data lock-in. They try to create "data moats" to protect their castles. No product will win on security and privacy features alone. They are critical for a small segment of adoption, but sadly haven't been a factor for mass adoption.

rapnie 9y ago
i think these business models already exist. you can find them in community startups that use decentralized technologies and semantic content to empower individuals to cooperate directly, create initiatives between parties without central authorities in control. the technologies just need to mature further, gain more traction.. and applications need to be created outside of the academic sphere (especially true for semantic web apps). i'd like to see true decentralized application frameworks that are semantic and truly decentralized. solid (https://github.com/solid/solid https://github.com/solid/solid ) is a great project for the semantic web, and so is http://ld-r.org/ http://ld-r.org/ then you also have ipfs.org, datproject.org, scuttlebot.io, mastodon social but the semantic web projects are too content-oriented and the others are either file-exchange or (limited) social web interpretations. afaik no truly decentralized messaging / application framework exists yet (though i have to investigate solid more thoroughly still)
- Kalium 9y ago
  I submit that we currently have a massively popular decentralized, federated, open standard messaging system. It goes by SMTP, and it's a cluster in many ways.
  - rapnie 9y ago
    yeah, agree. but this is low-level protocol. many mail (email) applications, but event-based application messaging frameworks? i could find some that come close.. do you have some good pointers?
- rubenverborgh 9y ago
  Messaging does exist; check out Linked Data Notifications (https://www.w3.org/TR/ldn/ https://www.w3.org/TR/ldn/).
pjc50 9y ago
I think people should back down slightly from full "no gods no masters" decentralisation, where everyone runs their own castle, and look to user-run mutual ownership structures. This is going to involve money changing hands. Users are going to have to pay enough that the people running the system get comfortable professional salaries - not unicorn money and not in SV, but it has to be competitive. Relying for the long term on altruism will only take you so far. In return, the users should get a genuine say in the policies of the system. This involves building not just a system but a community. Perhaps the closest to this model that's currently successful is Mastodon.
- rapnie 9y ago
  exactly! the whole current mindset around startups and unicorns and such is wrong (or warped). everything should be 'disruptive', earn a shitload of cash in short time.. but why? why is disruption always good. after all.. it disrupts! i would be perfectly happy creating non-disruptive products and earn a perfectly modest salary from it :)
rubenverborgh 9y ago
Technology is definitely not the only burden. Check out http://blog.dshr.org/2018/01/it-isnt-about-technology.html http://blog.dshr.org/2018/01/it-isnt-about-technology.html for a good argument.

by ozten 9y ago

rapnie 9y ago

i think these business models already exist. you can find them in community startups that use decentralized technologies and semantic content to empower individuals to cooperate directly, create initiatives between parties without central authorities in control. the technologies just need to mature further, gain more traction.. and applications need to be created outside of the academic sphere (especially true for semantic web apps). i'd like to see true decentralized application frameworks that are semantic and truly decentralized. solid (https://github.com/solid/solid https://github.com/solid/solid ) is a great project for the semantic web, and so is http://ld-r.org/ http://ld-r.org/ then you also have ipfs.org, datproject.org, scuttlebot.io, mastodon social but the semantic web projects are too content-oriented and the others are either file-exchange or (limited) social web interpretations. afaik no truly decentralized messaging / application framework exists yet (though i have to investigate solid more thoroughly still)

Kalium 9y ago
I submit that we currently have a massively popular decentralized, federated, open standard messaging system. It goes by SMTP, and it's a cluster in many ways.
- rapnie 9y ago
  yeah, agree. but this is low-level protocol. many mail (email) applications, but event-based application messaging frameworks? i could find some that come close.. do you have some good pointers?
rubenverborgh 9y ago
Messaging does exist; check out Linked Data Notifications (https://www.w3.org/TR/ldn/ https://www.w3.org/TR/ldn/).

pjc50 9y ago

I think people should back down slightly from full "no gods no masters" decentralisation, where everyone runs their own castle, and look to user-run mutual ownership structures. This is going to involve money changing hands. Users are going to have to pay enough that the people running the system get comfortable professional salaries - not unicorn money and not in SV, but it has to be competitive. Relying for the long term on altruism will only take you so far. In return, the users should get a genuine say in the policies of the system. This involves building not just a system but a community. Perhaps the closest to this model that's currently successful is Mastodon.

rapnie 9y ago
exactly! the whole current mindset around startups and unicorns and such is wrong (or warped). everything should be 'disruptive', earn a shitload of cash in short time.. but why? why is disruption always good. after all.. it disrupts! i would be perfectly happy creating non-disruptive products and earn a perfectly modest salary from it :)

rubenverborgh 9y ago

Technology is definitely not the only burden. Check out http://blog.dshr.org/2018/01/it-isnt-about-technology.html http://blog.dshr.org/2018/01/it-isnt-about-technology.html for a good argument.