SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Mike Masnick, usually editor for Techdirt, has written an essay on a technological approach to preserving free speech online in spite of the direction things have been heading in regards to locked-in platforms. He proposes moving back to an Internet where protocols dominate.
This article proposes an entirely different approach—one that might seem counterintuitive but might actually provide for a workable plan that enables more free speech, while minimizing the impact of trolling, hateful speech, and large-scale disinformation efforts. As a bonus, it also might help the users of these platforms regain control of their privacy. And to top it all off, it could even provide an entirely new revenue stream for these platforms.
That approach: build protocols, not platforms.
To be clear, this is an approach that would bring us back to the way the internet used to be. The early internet involved many different protocols—instructions and standards that anyone could then use to build a compatible interface. Email used SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol). Chat was done over IRC (Internet Relay Chat). Usenet served as a distributed discussion system using NNTP (Network News Transfer Protocol). The World Wide Web itself was its own protocol: HyperText Transfer Protocol, or HTTP.
In the past few decades, however, rather than building new protocols, the internet has grown up around controlled platforms that are privately owned. These can function in ways that appear similar to the earlier protocols, but they are controlled by a single entity. This has happened for a variety of reasons. Obviously, a single entity controlling a platform can then profit off of it. In addition, having a single entity can often mean that new features, upgrades, bug fixes, and the like can be rolled out much more quickly, in ways that would increase the user base.
Earlier on SN:
Re-decentralizing the World-Wide Web (2019)
Decentralized Sharing (2014)
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 30 2019, @11:22PM (1 child)
IBM charging for "support, begging for donations, or auctioning feature requests"?
What are you smoking? IBM is a systems integrator, not a small time beggar. RedHat did sell support licenses but they have been bought by IBM now, so I expect systems integration to make up a larger share of its business now. The last one, Apache, is a non profit. Do you think we can all work for non profits?
And in the end, you have named large companies and a non profit. You still must still work for a big company to survive. Try surviving this way on your own...
BTW, tell me if you support yourself using the means you recommend. I'm going to guess NO.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Saturday August 31 2019, @02:54PM
I support myself by selling custom software work, where what my clients need isn't already out there on the market. And I do that on my own. It's not big bucks, but it's a living. It takes a certain amount of self-discipline, an ability to interact well with customers, and keeping your promises and taking responsibility for your failures so you build up a good reputation.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.