5 ms·

Here's the issue. No one cares. Well, I care, and presumably a number of other readers care, but compared to the total sum of internet users we're just a roundi

by ender7 15y ago

Here's the issue. No one cares. Well, I care, and presumably a number of other readers care, but compared to the total sum of internet users we're just a rounding error. You know why people are using services like Gmail? Because it just works. Have you ever tried setting up your own mail server? I like to think that I'm pretty damn skilled with "the computer" but after a day of tweaking I'm still not sure mine is operating properly. The sad fact is that being idealistic is not enough. You have to be idealistic and better than the bad guys. If you offer people a system that is hard to use, wastes their time, and/or is simply inferior to other options, no one will ever use it no matter how idealistically pure it is. Then you just sound like an asshole when you say "you're all morally inferior for refusing to degrade your experience." So. Fix your system. Make it better than what we currently have. Then come back and convince me to care (hint: if your solution involves end-users installing and maintaining multiple servers, you're doing it wrong).

j_baker 15y ago
To be fair, the author (appears to) work for Canonical who has had success working to make idealistic software more approachable. So it appears to me that he isn't some Ivory Tower FOSS advocate, and is merely stating a personal preference.
- paulv 15y ago
  He doesn't work for Canonical. The domain is canonical.org, not canonical.com.
- sciurus 15y ago
  "kragen has worked for a variety of companies doing mostly cool things. In early 2006, he pulled up stakes and headed to South America, to begin exploring how he can empower people through technology. And to work on his Spanish."
- kragen 15y ago
  I do not now work for and never have worked for Canonical Software, although they tried to buy our domain early on, and they're good folks. I recuse myself from the question of whether I am or am not an ivory-tower FOSS advocate.
SoftwareMaven 15y ago
Ironically, I think that is exactly what the OP was saying. He would rather be working on solving the distributed problems than solving the centralized problems. He recognizes central is working better today, but that doesn't mean it will be tomorrow.
chernevik 15y ago
Me care too. But centralization, in the right hands, seems able to produce some genuine advances. I hate that the iPad is closed. But I really think its ease of use, and the ethic of usability it requires for "app" success, and its functionalities, make it a compelling step forward. I really wish, for many reasons, I could better articulate why. It's very hard to see how a decentralized community could implement such a vision -- it _might_ arrive at a similar or better place through evolution. But look how long Linux has had to hit the desktop target. I don't think centralization is the inevitable winner. The decentralized can and do follow these innovations, and the centralized seem to struggle to keep up with the pace of innovation. But lately we've seen some advantages for centralization that decentralization hasn't yet met.
chernevik 15y ago
Me care too. But centralization, in the right hands, seems able to produce some genuine advances. I hate that the iPad is closed. But I really think its ease of use, and the ethic of usability it requires for "app" success, and its functionalities, make it a compelling step forward. I really wish, for many reasons, I could better articulate why. It's very hard to see how a decentralized community could implement such a vision -- it _might_ arrive at a similar or better place through evolution. But look how long Linux has had to hit the desktop target. I don't think centralization is the inevitable winner. The decentralized can and do follow these innovations, and the centralized seem to struggle to keep up with the pace of innovation. But lately we've seen some advantages for centralization that decentralization hasn't yet met.
kragen 15y ago
You have nicely restated the point of the last four paragraphs of my post‡. However, your tone makes it sound like you think you're disagreeing with me. This leads me to believe my post was not clear to you, but I am unfortunately at a loss as to how I could have made it any clearer. Do you have any suggestions? ‡ actually, you added some points of your own as well. To be specific, I never said anything about moral inferiority, and your "hint" is idiotic, analogous to the guy who thinks most Americans will never own their own vehicle because it's too much work to take care of the horses properly.

by ender7 15y ago

j_baker 15y ago

To be fair, the author (appears to) work for Canonical who has had success working to make idealistic software more approachable. So it appears to me that he isn't some Ivory Tower FOSS advocate, and is merely stating a personal preference.

paulv 15y ago
He doesn't work for Canonical. The domain is canonical.org, not canonical.com.
sciurus 15y ago
"kragen has worked for a variety of companies doing mostly cool things. In early 2006, he pulled up stakes and headed to South America, to begin exploring how he can empower people through technology. And to work on his Spanish."
kragen 15y ago
I do not now work for and never have worked for Canonical Software, although they tried to buy our domain early on, and they're good folks. I recuse myself from the question of whether I am or am not an ivory-tower FOSS advocate.

SoftwareMaven 15y ago

Ironically, I think that is exactly what the OP was saying. He would rather be working on solving the distributed problems than solving the centralized problems. He recognizes central is working better today, but that doesn't mean it will be tomorrow.

chernevik 15y ago

Me care too. But centralization, in the right hands, seems able to produce some genuine advances. I hate that the iPad is closed. But I really think its ease of use, and the ethic of usability it requires for "app" success, and its functionalities, make it a compelling step forward. I really wish, for many reasons, I could better articulate why. It's very hard to see how a decentralized community could implement such a vision -- it _might_ arrive at a similar or better place through evolution. But look how long Linux has had to hit the desktop target. I don't think centralization is the inevitable winner. The decentralized can and do follow these innovations, and the centralized seem to struggle to keep up with the pace of innovation. But lately we've seen some advantages for centralization that decentralization hasn't yet met.

chernevik 15y ago

kragen 15y ago

You have nicely restated the point of the last four paragraphs of my post‡. However, your tone makes it sound like you think you're disagreeing with me. This leads me to believe my post was not clear to you, but I am unfortunately at a loss as to how I could have made it any clearer. Do you have any suggestions? ‡ actually, you added some points of your own as well. To be specific, I never said anything about moral inferiority, and your "hint" is idiotic, analogous to the guy who thinks most Americans will never own their own vehicle because it's too much work to take care of the horses properly.