3 ms·

The problem is, all of those guys who were so free in the nineties failed to create any noteworthy online services so Facebook, Google, etc. took up the space.

The problem is, all of those guys who were so free in the nineties failed to create any noteworthy online services so Facebook, Google, etc. took up the space. I'm gonna get down voted for that, but maybe if there were less nerd-wars in FOSS community and more thinking about real users the Internet would look differently nowadays.

fidotron 12y ago
It's a question of timing. We did have social networks in the 90s, but the devices at the edge weren't strong enough to make them compelling, particularly as regards photos. If you rolled back to the 90s you'd also notice AOL were regarded as a giant invincible behemoth in a similar position to Facebook or Google today.
kragen 12y ago
I don't think it's true that we failed to create any noteworthy online services. We built the internet. Maybe you've heard of it. We also created TCP, UDP, IP, DNS, email, the Web, Usenet, IRC, Git, BitTorrent, Tor, Bitcoin, and Wikipedia. We killed AOL, CompuServe, Encyclopedia Britannica, Solaris, the Information Superhighway, and the Advanced Intelligent Network. We were only unable to do smartphones because the carriers ruthlessly shut us out, demanding insane amounts of control over handset software and using their regulatory capture of the FCC as leverage, until Apple forced the doors open for us — but on Apple's terms. And we built most of the software that runs Apple, Facebook, and Google, too. But how can we build new services to replace Facebook and Google on a decentralized basis, like email and the Web? That's a problem with both technical aspects — how can you build a distributed full-text query processor that runs on the machines of volunteers? — and social/business aspects — how can the people who benefit from these services effectively collaborate to get them created and improved? (Kickstarter and the like show a very promising direction for this.) Those are the problems I want to be working on, not how to persuade Google Drive users to entrust a well-intentioned but unaccountable central authority with all of their family photos.
- mszyndel 12y ago
  I;m not diminishing achievements you mentioned and I'm very well aware of them. You must admit however that not all of them can be attributed to FOSS, and all of them are quite low-level compared to what average user needs to be able to use it effectively. I just wonder if we need 10 major Linux distros none of which is easy to set up and use to an average user. (sorry, even Ubuntu is still not there) I am a big believer in open web and it makes me cringe every time I see a new cool technology that uses closed protocols (or rather APIs) as it happens with IoT right now. But it's hard for me to attribute it to anything else than lack of leadership from FOSS community.
  - worklogin 12y ago
    Ubuntu is pretty much there. The only reason Ubuntu can't do some things is because of the requirement of Flash and DRM, both of which are obsolete or overbearing technologies we should avoid. >it's hard for me to attribute it to anything else than lack of leadership from FOSS community. So when it's a consortium of multi-billion dollar tech companies with massive R&D budgets, political connections and marketing dollars, it's FOSS's fault. OK.
    - mszyndel 12y ago
      Hey, what I just said is - spend less time on bs and more on creating valuable tools to everyday users and world will be a better place. It's not about fault, it's about lack of impact. Imagine how cool place would this world be if Linux was major customer OS and open source languages would be major ones used to create customer software with open protocols. Call me idealist but I would totally sacrifice half of the Linux distros to achieve those goals... :)
  - kragen 12y ago
    FOSS and decentralized systems are not the same thing, although they are in some sense analogous (I wrote an influential draft essay about this in 2006 at http://osdir.com/ml/culture.people.kragen.thinking/2006-07/msg00000.html http://osdir.com/ml/culture.people.kragen.thinking/2006-07/m...), and they tend to reinforce each other. Email is a decentralized system, and that's still true even if everybody's server is running Exchange and Lotus Notes, which are proprietary. I don't think Usenet, email, IRC, Tor, and the web are "quite low-level compared to what average user needs to be able to use it effectively." In fact, I am at a loss as to how your comment is potentially relevant to mine.
userbinator 12y ago
Maybe they didn't create any "noteworthy online services", but they created all the infrastructure they depend on.

fidotron 12y ago

It's a question of timing. We did have social networks in the 90s, but the devices at the edge weren't strong enough to make them compelling, particularly as regards photos. If you rolled back to the 90s you'd also notice AOL were regarded as a giant invincible behemoth in a similar position to Facebook or Google today.

kragen 12y ago

I don't think it's true that we failed to create any noteworthy online services. We built the internet. Maybe you've heard of it. We also created TCP, UDP, IP, DNS, email, the Web, Usenet, IRC, Git, BitTorrent, Tor, Bitcoin, and Wikipedia. We killed AOL, CompuServe, Encyclopedia Britannica, Solaris, the Information Superhighway, and the Advanced Intelligent Network. We were only unable to do smartphones because the carriers ruthlessly shut us out, demanding insane amounts of control over handset software and using their regulatory capture of the FCC as leverage, until Apple forced the doors open for us — but on Apple's terms. And we built most of the software that runs Apple, Facebook, and Google, too. But how can we build new services to replace Facebook and Google on a decentralized basis, like email and the Web? That's a problem with both technical aspects — how can you build a distributed full-text query processor that runs on the machines of volunteers? — and social/business aspects — how can the people who benefit from these services effectively collaborate to get them created and improved? (Kickstarter and the like show a very promising direction for this.) Those are the problems I want to be working on, not how to persuade Google Drive users to entrust a well-intentioned but unaccountable central authority with all of their family photos.

mszyndel 12y ago
I;m not diminishing achievements you mentioned and I'm very well aware of them. You must admit however that not all of them can be attributed to FOSS, and all of them are quite low-level compared to what average user needs to be able to use it effectively. I just wonder if we need 10 major Linux distros none of which is easy to set up and use to an average user. (sorry, even Ubuntu is still not there) I am a big believer in open web and it makes me cringe every time I see a new cool technology that uses closed protocols (or rather APIs) as it happens with IoT right now. But it's hard for me to attribute it to anything else than lack of leadership from FOSS community.
- worklogin 12y ago
  Ubuntu is pretty much there. The only reason Ubuntu can't do some things is because of the requirement of Flash and DRM, both of which are obsolete or overbearing technologies we should avoid. >it's hard for me to attribute it to anything else than lack of leadership from FOSS community. So when it's a consortium of multi-billion dollar tech companies with massive R&D budgets, political connections and marketing dollars, it's FOSS's fault. OK.
  - mszyndel 12y ago
    Hey, what I just said is - spend less time on bs and more on creating valuable tools to everyday users and world will be a better place. It's not about fault, it's about lack of impact. Imagine how cool place would this world be if Linux was major customer OS and open source languages would be major ones used to create customer software with open protocols. Call me idealist but I would totally sacrifice half of the Linux distros to achieve those goals... :)
- kragen 12y ago
  FOSS and decentralized systems are not the same thing, although they are in some sense analogous (I wrote an influential draft essay about this in 2006 at http://osdir.com/ml/culture.people.kragen.thinking/2006-07/msg00000.html http://osdir.com/ml/culture.people.kragen.thinking/2006-07/m...), and they tend to reinforce each other. Email is a decentralized system, and that's still true even if everybody's server is running Exchange and Lotus Notes, which are proprietary. I don't think Usenet, email, IRC, Tor, and the web are "quite low-level compared to what average user needs to be able to use it effectively." In fact, I am at a loss as to how your comment is potentially relevant to mine.

userbinator 12y ago

Maybe they didn't create any "noteworthy online services", but they created all the infrastructure they depend on.