W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > July 2012

Introducing Myself and PeerPoint

From: Poor Richard <poor.ricardo@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:01:31 -0500
Message-ID: <CAEf5-xfbWCetNrjum2Zhmt7SwKUUw6kkt=Qq3y6X98HU_93Hqg@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-rww@w3.org
Hi RWW team,

I'm Poor Richard, new to the group and W3C community. I'm a writer these
days with some old (but pretty varied) IT experience in a corporate LAN/WAN
distributed computing and web 1.0 environment. I used to design and code
some intranet, web, and database apps but I haven't fired up a code editor
or IDE in about a decade. All I can say I've retained is a general
familiarity with the development process and some internet and www
fundamentals. Now I'm retired and what I mainly do is write.

Lately I've started working on something which is a bit of a stretch
called"PeerPoint: An Open
P2P Requirements Definition and Design Specification Proposal."

PeerPoint is an embryonic requirements definition. What is different about
it, as far as I can tell, is that it aims to encompass all of web 3.0 in
scope, starting at the topmost level of user requirements, predicated on
the urgent imperatives for greater social justice, sustainability, and an
open society. In short, PeerPoint aims to describe the full compilation of
applications we desperately need for a new economy and a new culture. The
big corporations like Google and Facebook are working towards greater
enclosure (more walled gardens), more user surveillance, more user
exploitation, etc. so the internet actually becomes more centralized and
less free by the month. The internet is not getting any 99% or OWS
friendlier. An internet platform for implementing a fair and sustainable
society must come from the indy FOSS community, and it must be designed to
be a free (or very low cost) turnkey commodity for masses of generic,
non-technical internet citizens.

"Master plans" like PeerPoint are generally considered naive in FOSS land
because non-commercial development is self-motivated and anarchistic. Thus
few have taken on the job of planning beyond their own technical spheres of
interest. And nobody (as far as I can tell) in the FOSS world has been
assigned or taken it upon themselves to define and aggregate the user
requirements over all major application domains under one framework. Not
finding a coherent, universal mapping between the people's needs and
current technical capabilities, I appointed myself and anyone I can recruit
to do this.

PeerPoint is not intended to replace existing requirements definitions or
specifications but rather to complement them. It is intended to be a
cross-reference between user needs and the most appropriate solution sets.
It is meant to connect dots and fill in gaps in the hope of more rapid
convergence and more comprehensive, seamless solutions. Because the
resource in shortest supply for Planet Earth is time, not programmers.

I'm not lobying to make PeerPoint a RWW project, but everyone is warmly
invited to check it out and to collaborate if the spirit moves you.

If you do open the PeerPoint doc, please let me know at what page you stop
reading.

Richard

PeerPoint:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TkAUpUxdfKGr_5Qio2SlZcnBu_sgnZWdoVTZuD_Regs/edit?pli=1#
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2012 13:31:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 July 2012 13:32:03 GMT