3 ms·
I really wish the OS vendors weren't asleep at the wheel on this one, or otherwise being distracted by the effort to just 'move everything to the cloud'. Imagi
by fit2rule 7y ago
I really wish the OS vendors weren't asleep at the wheel on this one, or otherwise being distracted by the effort to just 'move everything to the cloud'.
Imagine if we had an OS that solved the usability problems of IPFS and made it immensely easy to publish content on ones own named segment of an IPFS network - instead of having things like Dropbox glom themselves around a paltry excuse for file-sharing system services that exist in most modern OS's today?
Wouldn't it be grand if someone write an email client - yes, EMAIL - that integrated with a smart contact system, allowing one to run and operate ones own social network without requiring any further infrastructure beyond local, private email services. Everything I do on Facebook, I was once able to do just as easily on Email - the interface is the only difference. I want social networking back under my control again, and a return to email, wrapped in a better local tool for providing the services, is the way to do it.
I also want to be able to turn myself off the Internet - having the ability to turn my phone off and be unavailable to the Internet at large - not just as a consumer, but also as a provider of information - should be a basic, inarguable right.
If the OS vendors weren't chasing the cloud bucks, this would be a reality.
I believe an opportunity for a smart team exists: build a Linux distribution which incorporates a few basic ideological rules:
* The user owns their data
* The user controls their data
* No new services or protocols are needed to provide better services: Use OSI properly or GTFO
* The UI is the final frontier for freedom
* If the user wants to fully disappear: OFF SWITCH
* If the user wants to engage in public discourse: ON SWITCH
* De-centralize all the things, bring control back to the local user always
As the years go by, I feel more and more inclined to start a test-bed Linux distro which uses these rules to build out a user-controlled OS designed for widespread content distribution on the basis of such things as IPFS, albeit with a much, much better UI for maintaining ones assets than currently exists. If anyone else is interested in such an experiment, I am all ears ..
- theamk 7y agoBtw, "OFF SWITCH" is fundamentally incompatible with IPFS. If you serve your website from IPFS, the first visitor will get the full copy and start serving it. You can toggle your switch as much as you want, this won't have any effect. It's funny that Facebook is much better at giving control to user than email. At least in Facebook, you can delete post. And once you send email, there is no way to retract it.
- fit2rule 7y agoSo, I don't put anything on IPFS that I don't want to be able to turn off. Things I want to be able to turn off, I leave on my local machine, and when it is off, things are off. The point is that the OS UI should accommodate this use case just fine. Facebook/Email: and again - this is a UI problem, not a transport one. If I send a mail saying 'delete the last message I just sent', the UI can do that for me. Its a UI feature, not a bug.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago> It's funny that Facebook is much better at giving control to user than email. At least in Facebook, you can delete post. And once you send email, there is no way to retract it. This is hitting straight into data ownership question. As a sender, I might want the ability to retract a message I sent. As a receiver, however, I do not want the sender to have that ability. Once a message reaches my inbox, I want to own it. I'm strongly on the receiver side on this one. This is how it works in meatspace - once you send a message, you can't unsend it; it belongs to the transport layer and then to the receiver.