Re: [Social-discuss] Languages -- let's make a web application

[Ted Smith]

On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 15:30 -0400, Henry Litwhiler wrote:
> On 3/28/10 3:28 PM, Ted Smith wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 15:23 -0400, Kaliya wrote:
> >    
> >> On Mar 28, 2010, at 3:05 PM, Ted Smith wrote:
> >>
> >>      
> >>> On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 11:13 -0700, Jason Self wrote:
> >>>        
> >>>> Matt Lee<address@hidden>  wrote ..
> >>>>          
> >>>>> On 03/28/2010 02:03 PM, Henry Litwhiler wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>            
> >>>>>> I don't see why users have to be able to use commodity hosting.
> >>>>>> If we
> >>>>>> make it easy enough, anyone can host their own GNU Social
> >>>>>> install, p2p
> >>>>>> style.
> >>>>>>              
> >>>>> Because I don't believe the majority of people will.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What will they host it on? The majority of Facebook users don't
> >>>>> have a
> >>>>> machine they can install their own servers on. Being able to use
> >>>>> this
> >>>>> from anywhere is key for success, and that means browser based.
> >>>>>            
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> Plus, remember that many ISPs (at least in the U.S.) prohibit their
> >>>> customers
> >>>> from running "servers" under penalty of cancellation.
> >>>>          
> >>> The GNU Project should not bend itself to the whims of profiteering
> >>> leeches.
> >>>        
> >> I guess it is totally unsurprising to hear talk like this.
> >>
> >> I have been working with very idealistic folks working on identity and
> >> much of what you are talking about for a long time.   In order to get
> >> systems of the magnitude of everyone having control of their own data
> >> online and the freedom to peer-to-peer link and freedom to organize
> >> one needs to work with business and transform the exploitive systems
> >> that underly our world today into ones that are ethically moral and
> >> for the people.
> >>
> >> To get things to work and be supported resources and money need to flow.
> >> Business in itself is NOT the DEVIL.
> >>      
> > Indeed it is not, but that was not what I was addressing. Businesses
> > that attempt to divide users so that they cannot interact with one
> > another as peers and make them "consumers" are the devil.
> >
> > Maybe there are good ethical businesses in the world - such a question
> > is outside the scope of GNU Social. But these ISPs and non-free software
> > companies, they certainly are not.
> >    
> Rather than trying to encourage users to go in the direction of outright 
> defiance, we might do better to find ways for them to get around the 
> restrictions set up by these ISPs, something that can be accomplished 
> through GNU Social.

If you mean using p2p, I agree with you, but that's still some level of
defiance. I don't see any way to do this without some level of defiance
without introducing software as a service, which is unethical. The
problem is that these ISPs only permit users to communicate with the
outside world through SaaS.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part