5 ms·

I think the problem with that proposal. also the problem with Ted Nelson's xanadu. and why the web was so successful are malicious actors, these can come in the

by somat 3y ago

I think the problem with that proposal. also the problem with Ted Nelson's xanadu. and why the web was so successful are malicious actors, these can come in the form of antagonists and trolls but most often appear in the form of marketing. Most designs for information systems fail to account for malicious actors(the web is included in this category). and those that do, fail to get popular, mainly because secure systems are unpleasant to use. The web is resistant to this despite not being designed in a secure manner because all graph traverses are one way, the owner controls all outgoing links. I suspect any system where outgoing links are open territory would soon get overrun by spam.

austin-cheney 3y ago
Maybe. The web became popular because third parties, Spyglass and Mosaic, evolved it into something visually appealing early. Competing internet applications didn’t have this except maybe email with its pseudo-standard form display of address fields and subject line. The goal and intention of the web was always sharing information via hyperlinks such that the collection of links naturally forms its own descriptive metadata. In this regard the web has largely failed with content being relegated to walled gardens. The very first step in this regard was Roy Fielding updating HTTP into a series of methods describing database operations, as opposed to merely transmission or content description, and nobody challenged it. In that regard the advancing malicious actors were early and close to home. If I were to learn from this and create a competing application I would ensure from the very beginning the technologies are single paradigm, extremely primitive, and fail if extended beyond their isolated area of concern so that malicious third parties are forced to advance transmission and content each in isolation from each other and from the underlying technologies. I would also ensure there is a single convention to describe both content and interaction because absolutely cannot figure out the front end.
marbu 3y ago
I would say that the web become popular way before significant malicious actors adapted to the web arrived. The web stated as an open system available to be used for practical use cases, and grown exponentially from there.

by somat 3y ago

austin-cheney 3y ago

Maybe. The web became popular because third parties, Spyglass and Mosaic, evolved it into something visually appealing early. Competing internet applications didn’t have this except maybe email with its pseudo-standard form display of address fields and subject line. The goal and intention of the web was always sharing information via hyperlinks such that the collection of links naturally forms its own descriptive metadata. In this regard the web has largely failed with content being relegated to walled gardens. The very first step in this regard was Roy Fielding updating HTTP into a series of methods describing database operations, as opposed to merely transmission or content description, and nobody challenged it. In that regard the advancing malicious actors were early and close to home. If I were to learn from this and create a competing application I would ensure from the very beginning the technologies are single paradigm, extremely primitive, and fail if extended beyond their isolated area of concern so that malicious third parties are forced to advance transmission and content each in isolation from each other and from the underlying technologies. I would also ensure there is a single convention to describe both content and interaction because absolutely cannot figure out the front end.

marbu 3y ago

I would say that the web become popular way before significant malicious actors adapted to the web arrived. The web stated as an open system available to be used for practical use cases, and grown exponentially from there.