Notices by Bob Mottram ๐ง โ โ (bob@soc.freedombone.net), page 13
Bob Mottram ๐ง โ โ (bob@soc.freedombone.net)'s status on Thursday, 29-Nov-2018 12:05:54 EST
Bob Mottram ๐ง โ โ "the thing is, a lot of those people [kids on Arpanet in the 1970s] felt outcast by societyโthey were geeks; their families and their fellow students didnโt understand them; they had nobody. And we welcomed them into the community [at MIT AI lab] and invited them to learn and start to do some useful work. It was amazing for them not to be treated as trash."
The real story is that Facebook's attempts to become more of an explicitly political actor have been hitting the fan. Zuck's tour of the US, which everyone thought was the beginning of a presidential bid, was probably the start of his attempt to understand the political landscape. He realized that Facebook couldn't stay out of politics and was trying to get more of a handle on it, outside of his usual bubble.
If you have a few billion people in the walled garden and you're making content decisions about what they see then this is always going to have an inescapable political dimension. You can claim to be "apolitical" and just following some censorship decision tree, but at some point that becomes no longer credible.
The obvious application for saving files though would be things like keys for UIs like RiotWeb. Saving keys in the cache isn't a good idea.
If it was restricted to that type of use I'd be ok with adding the ability to access the filesystem. Anything much beyond that just becomes an attack vector.
@BartG95 Not only are they not technically decentralized but they're also not economically decentralized. If you ignore the numbers and just look at who is getting real bread-on-the-table type value out of it then it's always a very tiny number of individuals, with all the other users just being accessories to the ponzi scheme.
But even that being the case, blockchainers have somehow managed to claim the word "decentralized" as their own. It think this is because the technology is just slightly beyond most people's cognitive event horizon.
So if you want to pressure companies in this way you'll have to pressure them to change their business models. Doing anything else will just be like deckchairs on the Titanic.
It's written from the venture capital perspective, so startup culture is uncritically endorsed and there are various other questionable assumptions about corporate involvement. In some places there are also references to the myth of the lone developer ("rockstar" type thinking).
The problem it describes is that the current economy depends heavily on software and that underneath the glossy startups the infrastructure comprises largely of Free Software developed and maintained by a relatively small community of "key contributors". The software economy is mostly free riding upon the digital infrastructure base, and there isn't much systematic thinking about how to keep the infrastructure level going in the longer term.
I'd describe this problem in terms of the failing social reproduction of developers. It might be easier than ever to learn python, but it can be hard to make ends meet while running a software project, even if it's vital to the free rider economy.
It gives the classic example of OpenSSL - something which runs on the majority of internet servers and yet which in 2014 at the time of heartbleed was maintained by just one developer in precarious circumstances and hardly funded.
Bob Mottram ๐ง โ โ (bob@soc.freedombone.net)'s status on Sunday, 18-Nov-2018 17:13:20 EST
Bob Mottram ๐ง โ โ "Today, everybody uses open source code, including Fortune 500 companies, government, major software companies and startups. Sharing, rather than building proprietary code, turned out to be cheaper, easier, and more efficient. This increased demand puts additional strain on those who maintain this infrastructure, yet because these communities are not highly visible, the rest of the world has been slow to notice. Most of us take opening a software application for granted, the way we take turning on the lights for granted. We donโt think about the human capital necessary to make that happen."
@maiyannah Due to automation over the last hundred years farming is a tiny fraction of the economy. Also in recent decades many farmers were screwed by the supermarkets.
If times were hard enough the UK probably could be agriculturally self-sufficient although it would take a large mobilization comparable to what happened in Cuba.
@thegibson I saw some videos and it looks more like a gimmick than anything practical. I can imagine flexible screens being useful for cylindrical displays at exhibitions or for large curved monitors.
Most of the UK's trade is with other EU countries. If anything interferes with that then there could be big trouble, and Theresa May resigning would be the least of it.
Think peasants with pitchforks, or the 21st century equivalent.
If the UK, collectively, is short on groceries then neither the US nor Russia are going to want to solve that problem. If they were to play any part at all it would be something like US dumping of surplus corn.