- From: <bd@thinkmetrics.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 11:56:44 -0000
- To: <delfin@delfiramirez.info>, "'Henry Story'" <henry.story@bblfish.net>
- Cc: <public-philoweb@w3.org>, "'Alexandre Monnin'" <aamonnz@gmail.com>, <team-community-process@w3.org>
At the risk of being disruptive, I must disagree. A philosophy of the "web" is as meaningful as a philosophy of electrical devices or a philosophy of clockwork machinery. That the web can be equated with systems using TCP/IP is questionable, and will be difficult as new technical communication modes emerge. And may be overly restrictive. For example, to include questions such as "How we do prepare a robot to understand and feel?" is immediately problematic as part of this discussion if that robot cannot communicate with other devices. The question applies irrespective of the web capabilities of the robot. As IoT and AI come to permeate society to consider the role of digital technology becomes equivalent to a version of a generalised philosophy of modern technology. I enjoy a productive forum, but I do think a philosophy of the web is simply focused on a temporary, increasingly redundant, short stage in the history of technological development. Regards Dr Brandt Dainow bd@thinkmetrics.com www.thinkmetrics.com +353 86 248 2846 -----Original Message----- From: Delfi Ramirez - DR <delfin@delfiramirez.info> Sent: Tuesday 7 March 2023 02:00 To: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> Cc: public-philoweb@w3.org; Alexandre Monnin <aamonnz@gmail.com>; team-community-process@w3.org Subject: Re: Planning to close Philosophy of the Web Community Group due to inactivity unless we hear from you Dear All: Agredd with Henry, Philosophy of the Web. A little short of an enormous task to be fulfiled, involving for this a continuous interplay of diverse aspects and specialities. Which may have not been the case in the past years. Apologies for not being as much as I intend. Like everyone there are a lot of non-profit activities and little time to fuyllfill all of them. However, to close this space is in fact less than a sad ting. In our current days, it feels and seems more than ever needed a basis or skecth on the Philosophy of the Web (TCP/HTTPS protocol) because of a new realitieslike Artificial Intelligence ( or semantics applied to macjnes) the correct use of programming languages to develop algorithms which must represent the human dualism (Cartesian) versus the obbligated Monism of a computer (Leibniz). And this can be seen feasible as we work using cathegories or dictionaries, or vectors Needles to say, unlike any other discipline in human activity, Philosophy aims to present a global, transversal vision, which enables the sowing of innovative lines of research and development, given that it acts in a universal way, targeting the whole of all. If DesCartes or Leibniz can be mentioned in our days is just because their foundation and work is still present and real. As a subset of the human actibity, and more importantly, after the evolution of the Web, not as an engineering product, but as a platform for human interactivity, I consider it a pity that we do not have the necessary time to develop standards or guidelines born from the W3C Ciommunity to be applicable to other entities. How does the Web should work in a model of society thata does not allow encryption by default? How do we present in a decent manner that encryption has been an advantage , not a shield, for truusted communications, in a clear and solid manner that can be understood by our lawmakers? How we do prepare a robot to understand and feel catalogues we may ask her to find for us? GHow in our XXIst century, Philosophy, a discipline that historically has beenfor the authoritieseyes only, can be of help in our daily voice over the web, gesture over the web interaction ? Just mumbling. serves this, as an apology and acertain justification for the abandonment ofthis Philosophy of The Web Community. over the past months. Shall we promote, the community as well as to start to make use of collaborative platforms ( As the PWC is actually doing through Github) to interact each other and let others to play in, or shall be say until next time. Your choice. Best On 2023-03-06 19:20, Henry Story wrote: >> On 6. Mar 2023, at 19:35, Alexandre Monnin <aamonnz@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Dear All, >> >> It has been inactive indeed so I won't oppose its closure unless >> someone comes forward. > > > The idea of a philosophy of the web group remains a very good idea. > The problem is that philosophy done well takes a huge amount of time, > requiring professional assistance. Someone needs to help people who > want > to learn and who want to do the work. But philosophy also always seems > to > anyone untrained to be something obvious and easy, and the > risk is that one ends up having conversations about basics using up > huge amount of time. > > It is said that at the entrance of Plato�s academy was written > "Let no one ignorant of geometry enter� > > Geometry provides the type of discipline that one really needs to > discuss > these topics. So I have started a group called Web Cats that looks at > how Category Theory can be applied to the web. > > https://web-cats.gitlab.io/ > > > Hopefully, as a theory of the web using the unifying mathematical > language of > category theory is developed, it will be easier to ask philosophical > questions > about the web for which mathematical proofs can be provided as much as > possible. > > Of course, philosophy does not reduce to mathematics. I have one short > proposal > that enters geopolitics and security called the Web of Nations that I > put > forward here: > > https://co-operating.systems/2020/06/01/WoN.pdf > > It builds on my second-year report for a PhD thesis > I started a few years ago, but for which I ran out of money > > https://co-operating.systems/2019/04/01/ > > In the meantime, I have been building a Solid server and access control > libraries > for it. > > My aim is now to write the thesis out in smaller pieces as > articles, as it is easier to produce those and find the right > reviewers for them. > > In any case, I have not seen anyone really step up here to guide the > group. > That would require a paid role, I think. > > > Henry Story > > >> >> All the best, >> A.M. >> >> On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 7:29�PM Team Community Process >> <team-community-process@w3.org> wrote: >> Dear participants in the >> >> Philosophy of the Web Community Group >> https://www.w3.org/community/philoweb/ >> >> Your Community Group appears to have become inactive (per [1]). W3C >> plans to close this group in 10 days unless we hear compelling reasons >> from you to keep it open. >> >> Thank you, >> >> CG/BG System >> >> [1] https://www.w3.org/community/about/faq/#close-inactive >> >> >> > > Henry Story > > https://co-operating.systems > WhatsApp, Signal, Tel: +33 6 38 32 69 84? > Twitter: @bblfish > Mastodon: @bblfish@mathstodon.xyz
Received on Tuesday, 7 March 2023 11:57:02 UTC