Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
30 lines (22 loc) · 2.34 KB

motivations.md

File metadata and controls

30 lines (22 loc) · 2.34 KB

Why formalizing all this; isn't it just some aggreagate of existing concept with some trendy 'bitcoinization' and vaguish p2p somehow realistic models.

A lot of people may already have this vision, freenet version 0.6 do have this p2p vision, semantic web have this information relative vision, good old pgp do have web of trust idea. Yet everyday internet, web usage has not really evolve, maybe we should say it has regressed (just compare IRC to google talk (ok it is biased I should compare it to xmpp)).

Bitcoin has been the only successfull innovation going technically in the right direction.

I think the best way to communicate motivations would be to describe what seems a bit wrong with today web :

  • the model of internet started to evolve with p2p, yet some misuse leads to misunderstanding about this model. Today internet is centralized and big actor takes some sensitive place over information management. The model is still client server (even with websocket).
    • it is hard to compete, only one actor should lead, data interoperability would solve it but economical consideration makes it inpractical
    • company need to earn money (that's ok), but the model needs some trust to sell ads, and actually trust is only related to market dominant position : that is not really an issue but makes it difficult for alternative and a bit dangerous.
    • server and hosting infrastructure, makes it difficult to let web content survive, except for wikipedia donation model you need to rely on information exploitation (legally borderline) to monetarized yourself. P2p should have lowered the entry cost of free services (donation being firstly your participation in the network).
  • information/data is owned by actors (again exception of wikipedia) when actors should only be trusted to be the exploitant of those
    • even personal information
    • information interoperrability is a nice to have
    • information reusability is by linking (nothing wrong)
    • the general consensus is that you must protect information (private info obviously and also copyright). see trustright