5 ms·

It’s not a technology problem. It never really has been. It’s a business problem, which is another way of saying it's a people problem. People have been condit

by api 3y ago

It’s not a technology problem. It never really has been. It’s a business problem, which is another way of saying it's a people problem. People have been conditioned to believe all software must be free, but that SaaS is fine. People are willing to rent software in the cloud but not pay for it at the endpoint. Add to this the fact that the cloud is the ultimate DRM. It can’t be pirated if the user doesn’t even have binaries or have possession of their own data. SaaS provides inescapable recurring revenue and very strong lock in. It’s massively superior from a business model point of view. Meanwhile the (much more) evil twin of SaaS, namely “free” surveillance and addiction driven apps, dominates B2C. People might want local first software but if they won’t pay for it that doesn’t matter. The whole industry will wrap itself around whatever model pays. Everything is all about cloud and SaaS not because these are technically superior or better for the user but because that's where you get cash flow.

barrysteve 3y ago
It's deeper than cash flow. As soon as computing becomes a primary job and not a toy... people clam up about their ideas and stick to safe, generic, bland output. Computing as-a-job for random plebs, has sacrificed the protection of ideas in pursuit of more innovation and freedom. Resulting in the least innovation and freedom we've seen in decades. Until we can walk on water again, this spiral will not end. Why people cannot see this spiral and treat it like an existential threat to the web, I have no idea. A 'new kind of network' is surface level analysis, we need to stop computers sucking the life (and consciousness) out of everything they touch. Cash flow is way easier, when you can work on something novel and deliver it to the end customer without the concepts being stolen along the way.
- squigz 3y ago
  > A 'new kind of network' is surface level analysis, we need to stop computers sucking the life (and consciousness) out of everything they touch. Do you have any ideas on how we might do that?
  - barrysteve 3y ago
    Yes but I'm completely torn to whom and how I could actually say it. I don't know how people will react, if the key people approve, then I can say it, if they don't I have to keep it private to give it a chance at life. There's a constant tearing conflict in me, between the status quo programming I've learnt over the years and how I'd want it to be. It's been bubbling up for a while, everytime I touch a keyboard now I'm rapidly frustrated. It's also difficult to know if it could be finished before we switch to TPM/smaller/more locked down computers. It is hideously conflicting to be working on privacy tech and need to be internet connected to survelliance at the same time, how can you even begin when teacher is peeking over your shoulder constantly? It feels like death to share it, sorry! I've got to get it going and then let it live on it's own terms. Anything else is a tainted experiment I guess.
    - 6510 3y ago
      My idea seems more generic (or less specific) than the topic, perhaps it is of use: 1) The number of people with control over you should be as small as possible. 2) The number of people held responsible for your actions should also be as small as possible. 3) The number of people trusted with your security should also be as small as possible. If you are going to give up control in favor of convenience you should carefully consider if it is worth it and for how long. Control also means you can pay a huge price at any time. There is a certain risk for the deal to suddenly not be worth it. If you are going to have others be responsible for your writings and actions you should also carefully consider if it is worth it. The responsible thing to do could be to preemptively shut you down when in doubt. The legal situation/law may also change and require critical analysis of things you wrote long ago. Each word you write is a ticket in the false-positive lottery. Then when all of the above works out fine you still have to trust people, all of your documents may end up publicly available after some breach out of your control or encrypted behind a ransom paywall. It is going to be different from putting things on usb drives and keeping them in your vault physically.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
daitangio 3y ago
Yes, for sure SaaS is easier and cheaper (for 1 month :) than BigBoxSoftware you saw years ago. I am concerned by the threat to open source this model brings to us.
- api 3y ago
  I wasn’t speaking from the customers point of view but the producer’s. I was making a supply side argument for why we don’t have more local first software. But you’re right. I did’t get into friction or lack thereof as a factor.

by api 3y ago

barrysteve 3y ago

It's deeper than cash flow. As soon as computing becomes a primary job and not a toy... people clam up about their ideas and stick to safe, generic, bland output. Computing as-a-job for random plebs, has sacrificed the protection of ideas in pursuit of more innovation and freedom. Resulting in the least innovation and freedom we've seen in decades. Until we can walk on water again, this spiral will not end. Why people cannot see this spiral and treat it like an existential threat to the web, I have no idea. A 'new kind of network' is surface level analysis, we need to stop computers sucking the life (and consciousness) out of everything they touch. Cash flow is way easier, when you can work on something novel and deliver it to the end customer without the concepts being stolen along the way.

squigz 3y ago
> A 'new kind of network' is surface level analysis, we need to stop computers sucking the life (and consciousness) out of everything they touch. Do you have any ideas on how we might do that?
- barrysteve 3y ago
  Yes but I'm completely torn to whom and how I could actually say it. I don't know how people will react, if the key people approve, then I can say it, if they don't I have to keep it private to give it a chance at life. There's a constant tearing conflict in me, between the status quo programming I've learnt over the years and how I'd want it to be. It's been bubbling up for a while, everytime I touch a keyboard now I'm rapidly frustrated. It's also difficult to know if it could be finished before we switch to TPM/smaller/more locked down computers. It is hideously conflicting to be working on privacy tech and need to be internet connected to survelliance at the same time, how can you even begin when teacher is peeking over your shoulder constantly? It feels like death to share it, sorry! I've got to get it going and then let it live on it's own terms. Anything else is a tainted experiment I guess.
  - 6510 3y ago
    My idea seems more generic (or less specific) than the topic, perhaps it is of use: 1) The number of people with control over you should be as small as possible. 2) The number of people held responsible for your actions should also be as small as possible. 3) The number of people trusted with your security should also be as small as possible. If you are going to give up control in favor of convenience you should carefully consider if it is worth it and for how long. Control also means you can pay a huge price at any time. There is a certain risk for the deal to suddenly not be worth it. If you are going to have others be responsible for your writings and actions you should also carefully consider if it is worth it. The responsible thing to do could be to preemptively shut you down when in doubt. The legal situation/law may also change and require critical analysis of things you wrote long ago. Each word you write is a ticket in the false-positive lottery. Then when all of the above works out fine you still have to trust people, all of your documents may end up publicly available after some breach out of your control or encrypted behind a ransom paywall. It is going to be different from putting things on usb drives and keeping them in your vault physically.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]

daitangio 3y ago

Yes, for sure SaaS is easier and cheaper (for 1 month :) than BigBoxSoftware you saw years ago. I am concerned by the threat to open source this model brings to us.

api 3y ago
I wasn’t speaking from the customers point of view but the producer’s. I was making a supply side argument for why we don’t have more local first software. But you’re right. I did’t get into friction or lack thereof as a factor.