Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

The future of the web will be based on personal computing

 [1/9] from: edoconnor::gmail::com at: 22-Mar-2007 9:28


Just to keep the conversation flowing, here's a blog post titled: Why the Semantic Web Will Fail. The author (not me) makes some interesting points about the big corporate players on the web and how they're out to exploit you and appropriate your content for their advantage. Although open source isn't specifically mentioned, I assume the author would agree that only OSS is trustworthy, and that it is essential to preserve vitality and personal freedom on the web. Not intended to be flamebait about open source-- just a brief post that I thought might be interesting to share. Ed

 [2/9] from: edoconnor:gm:ail at: 22-Mar-2007 9:31


Sorry-- I forgot to include the link-- human error, not caused by the corporate Google overlord: http://halfanhour.blogspot.com/2007/03/why-semantic-web-will-fail.html On 3/22/07, Ed O'Connor <edoconnor-gmail.com> wrote:

 [3/9] from: gregg:pointillistic at: 22-Mar-2007 13:10


Hi Ed, EOC> Just to keep the conversation flowing, here's a blog post titled: EOC> Why the Semantic Web Will Fail. EOC> The author (not me) makes some interesting points about the big EOC> corporate players on the web and how they're out to exploit you EOC> and appropriate your content for their advantage. I agree with the author on the basic premise that there are a lot of people out there who are more concerned about themselves, than about helping others. I can speak first-hand about how features designed to help people share and collaborate were met with *enormous* resistance, and what people asked for was the ability to collect data that they could use to protect themselves without exposure. I win, you lose; that's OK. We both win; that's OK too. You might win, and there is a remote chance that I might lose; forget it. We both lose; that's better than you winning and me losing. Or maybe I'm just feeling cynical. :\ -- Gregg

 [4/9] from: moliad::gmail::com at: 22-Mar-2007 14:25


no, that's usually how it goes :-) propose a system which makes everyone accountable at your job and your boss will be up with chears telling you how good you are for the company .... remind him that everyone includes him.... and well... somehow the tone of the discussion changes a bit. ;-) that is actual experience on my part. from... "we've got to start next week... this will help us improve efficiency, boost margins! "... in the same discussion, changing to: "hum, that will cost a lot I guess, not sure its worth the risk, what if..." and then you know the rest... the project gets shelved, managers continue using excel misnamed files, lost, erased (at just the "appropriate" time) and the lower ranks get the blame, don't get raises and the "middle manager" justifies his salary with the "mountain of work" he has to do... (trying to keep tabs on all the half-truths he spreads around glorifying his incompetence to get results as a sign of his willingness to "hold the fort", so you should too! read as "do unpaid overtime"). humm well maybe I'm just feeling cynical too... ;-) -MAx On 3/22/07, Gregg Irwin <gregg-pointillistic.com> wrote:

 [5/9] from: carl::cybercraft::co::nz at: 23-Mar-2007 18:29


Interesting, but what makes anyone believe we'll always need the big corporate players? A small example of what I mean is this... http://community.livejournal.com/lj2wordpress/ where they're working on building a distributed clone of LiveJournal, just one that doesn't depend on central servers. (And yeah, using an LJ community to discuss it;) Could not the same be done with Flickr or MySpace? And maybe even searching? REBOL would be a cool tool for this - if only it was open-source... -- Carl Read. On Thursday, 22-March-2007 at 9:28:29 Ed O'Connor wrote,

 [6/9] from: edoconnor:gma:il at: 23-Mar-2007 7:47


>> what makes anyone believe we'll always need the big corporate players?
As long as the Internet isn't legislated away by politicians, we won't.
>> REBOL would be a cool tool for this - if only it was open-source...
With competition from big corporate players and open-source solutions, REBOL must find a place in the ecosystem. My hunch is that to remain viable, REBOL will need to adapt in one direction or the other. Regards, Ed

 [7/9] from: moliad::gmail::com at: 23-Mar-2007 9:01


my two cents, languages and most technologies, in fact, on the fringe NEVER get the push to become mainstream until MS nudges through their corporate platform. name it, sharepoint is just another example, there are thousands of collaborative systems. but the only one which will make a real impact will be sharepoint. MS only moves on things that WILL make money... its what they do. so they let everyone break their necks, and then buy out or copy the guys with the good ideas but no more cash. Java would not have taken off really unless MS had (sort of) supported it. look at flash... even though its installed practically anywhere, its still a fringe application used only for simple web development (by the masses I mean). if MS where to buy it out or make their own Flash interpreter... they would then integrate it everywhere and suddenly, you'd hear about Flash in every MS discussion and suddenly, it would become a mainstream dev platform, and many would use it for other things. (powerpoint?) basically, if you invent something, and MS decides to copy/buy/trample you, that's your indication for success... MS only moves when things are ready for success, and with their money, can give the final push to make it happen for real. This doesn't remove the need and desire for other systems, only that if you want to generate REVENUE, then the only juggernaught is still today MS. Some current players ARE changing the landscape though, and Google has definitively taken MS by surprise by their business model... but that is just it... its not the technology behind Google which is superior... its their business model... most of googles products are dead simple, and border on the barely usefull. so we must only continue to use REBOL increase the userbase, improve it and continue to offer faster response times. its a swiss army knive... just use it. -MAx On 3/23/07, Ed O'Connor <edoconnor-gmail.com> wrote:

 [8/9] from: brian::wisti::gmail::com at: 23-Mar-2007 13:27


Hi Maxim, On 3/23/07, Maxim Olivier-Adlhoch <moliad-gmail.com> wrote:
> my two cents,
My two cents are mingled below. Together we have four cents.
> languages and most technologies, in fact, on the fringe NEVER get the push > to become mainstream until MS nudges through their corporate platform.
Java? Perl? There are a lot of technologies that are mainstream within their intended domain. I'm not sure that the definition of "fringe" is Microsoft isn't selling it. I mean, relational databases were mainstream before SQL Server 1.0 in the late 1980s.
> name it, sharepoint is just another example, there are thousands of > collaborative systems. but the only one which will make a real impact will > be sharepoint. MS only moves on things that WILL make money... its what > they do. so they let everyone break their necks, and then buy out or copy > the guys with the good ideas but no more cash.
What's sharepoint? I could only find buzzwords at http://www.microsoft.com/sharepoint/default.mspx.
> Java would not have taken off really unless MS had (sort of) supported it.
Java was already taking off pretty quickly when MS tried to step in with J++ and their own VM. I was surprised that even non-programmers were asking me questions about Java as early as 1996.
> look at flash... even though its installed practically anywhere, its still a > fringe application used only for simple web development (by the masses I > mean).
But ... Flash was expressly written for Web development, wasn't it? It is definitely not fringe within that area. It seems like every time I talk to a client about building a site, they are asking me to include Flash.
> if MS where to buy it out or make their own Flash interpreter... they would > then integrate it everywhere and suddenly, you'd hear about Flash in every > MS discussion and suddenly, it would become a mainstream dev platform, and > many would use it for other things. (powerpoint?)
Adobe's Apollo project is the closest thing I could think of to Flash as a mainstream dev platform. I think Sparkle is the Microsoft answer to Flash. I'm not particularly interested in either, but they aren't trying to sell it to me. We'll see how this Adobe-versus-Microsoft thing works out.
> basically, if you invent something, and MS decides to copy/buy/trample you, > that's your indication for success... MS only moves when things are ready > for success, and with their money, can give the final push to make it happen > for real.
No, my primary indication for success is whether or not a business makes a profit. There are numerous lesser indicators, but "get copied/bought/trampled by Microsoft" is probably not a good one. Well, maybe "bought."
> This doesn't remove the need and desire for other systems, only that if you > want to generate REVENUE, then the only juggernaught is still today MS.
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
> their business model... most of googles products are dead simple, and border > on the barely usefull.
Didn't Microsoft start out with a BASIC interpreter? BASIC is almost the definition of dead simple and barely useful.
> so we must only continue to use REBOL increase the userbase, improve it and > continue to offer faster response times. its a swiss army knive... just > use it. > > -MAx
I will continue to use REBOL for exactly as long as I find it to be useful in general purpose light weight tasks. I am impatient for it to be more than a pocket knife with a corkscrew, though ;-) I think that my only problem with your post is based on differing definitions of success for a business. Mine is based simply on profit and maintaining whatever values the company has defined for itself. Yours appears to be based on widespread recognition and assimilation into normal corporate affairs. Your statements are probably accurate for that definition of success at this point in corporate history. Kind Regards, Brian Wisti http://coolnamehere.com/

 [9/9] from: carl:cybercraft at: 24-Mar-2007 16:42


On Friday, 23-March-2007 at 13:27:25 Brian Wisti wrote,
>I will continue to use REBOL for exactly as long as I find it to be >useful in general purpose light weight tasks. I am impatient for it to
<<quoted lines omitted: 5>>
>into normal corporate affairs. Your statements are probably accurate >for that definition of success at this point in corporate history.
But what is RT's definition of success? If it's based on 'widespread recognition and assimilation into normal corporate affairs', then they've not been too successful there. And the evidence for success by your definition is where? I suspect it's neither of those though, and more along the lines of 'changing the way computers are used, and for the better'. Revolutionaries seldom hand over the reins to others, and certainly not to those who they wish to replace. Their ideas are their precious till they day they die... -- Carl Read.

Notes
  • Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
    View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted