1. 2

    Agreed. We need to make the web fun again, and not just an ad delivery service.

    More creators, less consumers.

    1. 2

      Maybe we can all create and consume and be Consumeators.

      1. 0

        meanwhile, yourtilde is busy setting up a banner exchange that’s quite literally an ad delivery service ;P

        1. 1

          I see it more as a link exchange, much like a web-ring.

      1. 1

        Sadly, people will find it suspect, since DARPA did it, like with TOR. Baselessly.

        1. 2

          The FIDO Alliance is not what I thought it was, and has nothing to do with FIDO Nets.

          1. 1

            Life Hack Winner Of the Year :)

            1. 1

              /dev/lawyer is a pretty decent FOSS law blog. SO, while he is writing about a license he helped write, it’s not surprising.

              Headline is a bit clickbaity, though, to that I’ll agree.

              He does point out some of the fundamental problems with the licenses he discusses.

              1. 1

                Not sure how I feel about this… F5 hasn’t been particularly evil, as far as I know, but anytime a ginormous corporation purchases the organization behind a FOSS product, I get jittery.

                1. 3

                  No way. It’s almost like having micro-OSs which are black boxes is bad for security or something…

                  1. 3

                    Especially when it takes only one line to import someone else’s micro-OS as a base without needing to know anything about it or what is on it.

                    1. 3

                      What could possibly go wrong?

                  1. 1

                    Gopher can serve html pages and still <img src=“tacking.pixel.com”> and this is what bad actors would continue to do. Switching underlying protocols won’t fix the problem. Even without html the companies that want that data could still do stuff like getting data out of server logs, or using other unique identifiers in gopher url paths. I dunno, technology probably won’t be able to fix this problem.

                    1. 1

                      Gopher can serve html pages and still and this is what bad actors would continue to do

                      That’s a really good point. Unlike the web, Gopher has a chance to be saved from these things. It could be a really good time to draft and RFC or some kind of document about blocking tracking pixels from gopher html pages.

                      As for the server logs, accessing gophers through tor could help with that.

                      And yeah we need to also consider jamming the things that incentivize tracking. Good reminder that these problems aren’t solved only by technical means.

                      1. 1

                        In order to deliver a tracking pixel, the user would have to select it, purposefully.

                      1. 1

                        well this is terrifying

                        1. 1

                          I don’t mind PA’s weather. Mostly.

                        1. 1

                          Neat. Kinda like Scratch :)

                          1. 2

                            Linus’ MINIX = Linux

                            1. 2

                              MINIX is spelled incorrectly. It should be Minics. :)

                              1. 1

                                Turtles all the way down!

                            1. 1

                              awk is an extremely underutilized tool these days, it seems. Combined with perl, you can do some pretty fantastic records processing on a single machine much faster than you can on an ELKS or Hadoop cluster.

                              1. 2

                                add a little bit of sed too and yeah, arcane arts of mystical processing magic! ;P (sed can totally be replaced by perl stuff, but still…)

                              1. 1

                                Color me skeptical of this author’s view, as he is a mouthpiece for Bain Capital, one of the most predatory vulture capitalist firms in the world.

                                1. 1

                                  Case in point, if they really cared about using an open source license, the AGPL is already there to do exactly what they say the aim to do, while protecting the 4 freedoms.

                                  1. 1

                                    I agree with you that they are trying to exploit a vacuum in the Free Software licensing option.

                                    The fun fact is that they are debating with OSI that have alwaya beem very keen to please corporations. I followed the debate about SSPL on the OSI mailing list and some of their point holds.

                                    They are trying to force OSI to “stay relevant” in a way that serves their business model, not Free Software.

                                    On the other hand, the more we move towards a distributed computing system, the more AGPL is becomes a weak copyleft like LGPL: linking becomes less and less relevant while the right to self-host applications composed of several programs becomes more important.

                                    A totally different license that address these issues without trying to exploit developers is the Hacking License.

                                    The fun fact is that people who don’t want to listen about honest attempts to fix these issues will end supporting venture capitalist that will exploit them.

                                    1. 1

                                      I don’t see how the AGPL is weakened, as it appears to be the perfect license to use: All code used by Amazon, for example, to deliver a product using an AGPL’d license would need to be released back to the community. It’s one of the issues that counter dot social is running into right now: They are not in compliance right now with the AGPL, because all of the interconnected code used to deliver the site is not open sourced.

                                      The problem with the Hacking License, last I knew, was a lack of lawyer review, and it is very confusing and many terms are nebulous in their usage. Perhaps in a few years, with much refinement, it could be a suitable license.

                                      The problem is orgs like Bain Capital don’t care about free software, or open source, for that matter. They only care that their investments retain value so they can gut it out piecemeal. Them working on a license is enough to make me want to run far, far away, as fast as possible.

                                      There’s not really a vaccuum in the Free Software licensing options. The AGPL suits perfectly in this case.

                                      1. 1

                                        With all respect I’m afraid your reading of AGPL is widely extending its reach.

                                        An provider of AGPL based SaaS doesn’t need to provide sources of all software interconnected with the application.

                                        The only difference with GPLv3 is that IF the software is used through a network, the sources of THAT specific software (and its modifications) must be provided to the users.

                                        But if grep was AGPLv3 and used by GMail, Google should only provide users a way to download their modified grep, but nothing more than that.

                                        To me this limit the social benefit of a gift. To a venture capitalist this reduce their return of investment.

                                        Obviously, since we start with different concerns, we look for different solutions to the same problem.

                                        I’m pretty sure no VC would adopt the Hacking License just like I would never adopt the SSPL.

                                1. 1

                                  I agree with the title.

                                  To me, the rest seem pretty obtuse.
                                  In 2018 people should be talking of self-hosting, not about paying web hosting (that are likely to resell cloud services)

                                  1. 2

                                    I think paying for web hosting is one step above letting FB control your data.

                                    Of course, self-hosting is the best position to be in, but not everyone has a stable internet connection or the technical know-how to do that. Although, I would love for both of those to start moving in the right direction, baby steps first.

                                    1. 2

                                      there are literally web/ssh/vnc/ftp/etc server apps for android… hosting your own servers is easier than ever… tho stable net is one obstacle, the bigger one is ISPs not allowing incoming traffic…

                                      1. 1

                                        It sucks that ISPs have made it so difficult to have a home server - not impossible, just more difficult than it needs to be.

                                        If there was an iOS/Android app made to turn a phone into a server, that’d be incredible – I’d love to have people dial into my cellphone which hosts a BBS, but alas that’s only a dream.

                                        1. 1

                                          dialing part might be a dream, but server part definitely isn’t…tho your server will probably not reach the internet cause dam ISPs deciding so…

                                      1. 1

                                        This is what I have been using for awhile.

                                      1. 1

                                        Not sure how this is better than Keepass variants? Since it’s a FOSS project anyways, I don’t see why they don’t just contribute to KeepassXC, for example?

                                        1. 2

                                          I hope someday that Microsoft will give up on trying to create a working browser, and focus on creating a working operating system.

                                          1. 2

                                            I don’t know their strategy, but given WSL, I suspect they will soon give up on trying to create a working operating system.

                                            1. 2

                                              “… a buggy set of drivers…” is my hope, but with less “buggy” :)

                                          1. 1

                                            I hate protoduction…

                                            1. 1

                                              if you can, you should change the link to directly the wiki page

                                              1. 1

                                                For those interested: https://tildegit.org/ubergeek/.tilde/wiki/.tilde-TLD

                                                In fairness, at this point, if one can’t be bothered to scroll down and read the README, we don’t really want them using it at this point :). It’s not all ironed out as of yet.

                                                However, we are looking for new name servers! Right now, there are two IPv4 servers, and 1 IPv6 server. Preferably, we’d want at least one more IPv6, and 2 more IPv4s.

                                              1. 1

                                                Impressive!

                                                I have no idea about the process one need to follow to get assigned a TLD.

                                                1. 1

                                                  Either a pull request to the repo, adding your zone file, or an email to ubergeek at yourtilde dot com will do it.