On 1 August 2014 23:10, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2014-08-01 16:21, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > >> On 8/1/14 3:57 AM, Anders Rundgren wrote: >> > <snip> > > >> Since Google can put *hundreds of people* on developing various >>> browser/platform goodies while we appear not having a *single* >>> browser-developer at our disposal (although our task is *much more >>> difficult* than supporting "super-provider" schemes like Apple, Google or >>> PayPal), I think we are currently pretty much stuck. >>> >>> >> -1000 >> > > There's a simple explanation to why there are huge disagreements regarding > this point: > > A bunch of people here want to build something based on the existing web > technology and then get W3C's "Stamp of approval" as a part of their > marketing of the software. "We actually wrote the standard". > Everyone has different motivations. Personally, I simply was searching for a technology that would handle my use cases ie decentralized login and payments. To my complete amazement, no one had ever done that. I never dreamed I would be following standards work or interested in the semantic web. I understand your mindset, because I started as a sceptic, like most web 2.0 developers, but it's only once I discovered what it was that I realized it was the only technology that can handle the use cases I wanted, namely to make a website without lock in that I'd be happy to use myself, and that I'd be comfortable delivering to others. Web payments + WebID is pretty much the only way to do this, if another technology comes along that's decentralized I'll happily use it, but I dont know of any other group out there focussed on making truly decentralized, universal, modular technology. > > Traditional "standardizers" do rarely make their living on shipping > software, they rather want to create cool technology that presumably can do > things we couldn't do before. The driving force can be anything from > ego-boost to employer requests and occasionally altruism. > > Whatever "camp" you belong to, I think there are reasons to think twice on > how to proceed: > http://www.pcworld.com/article/2460020/android-grabs- > record-85-percent-smartphone-share.html > It is almost like when Microsoft won the desktop war; the competition > didn't saw it coming and the rest is history. > > Anders > > >
Received on Saturday, 2 August 2014 10:38:34 UTC