W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > September 2016

Re: How the father of the World Wide Web plans to reclaim it from Facebook and Google

From: Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:59:45 -0300
Message-ID: <CAOLUXBuMy5L+4sxF98b-0DMg2CwifXg5h8ndt9LvxRsmGBr8oQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org>
Cc: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>, public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>, Kaliya IDwoman <kaliya-id@identitywoman.net>, public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>
I'm trying to develop what could be a kind of 'backend' for Solid/LDP like
applications. As it will be an open source project I'm trying to delivery
the only artifact build yet. It is a draft of the spec of the system. Maybe
it could help.

Regards,
Sebastián.

On Aug 18, 2016 10:14 AM, "Sebastian Samaruga" <ssamarug@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe this could apply as a poor model theoretical foundation (see
> attachment). It's a very early inception draft of a functional API for a
> sets oriented implementation of triples/resources arrangement in a models
> of models approach.
>
> For example: Facts, data (triples SPOs) is the model of Semantics,
> information which in turn is the model for Behavior or knowledge.
>
> A potential deployment architecture with P2P semantics could use network
> infrastructure for addressing and resolution.
>
> The client sides of such a peer's application would use a JQuery like API
> to interact with models.
>
> A functional interpreter could use models & metadata as declarative means
> of rendering services in which to build upon applications or other services.
>
> Regards,
> Sebastián.
> My 2 cents: Linked Data is great, but what it lacks is a theoretical
> model below it, on which other efforts can build. Of the W3C specs,
> only RDF has semantics, while SPARQL has an algebra. Why not LDP? That
> has produced a myriad of LD stacks with duplicating features and low
> interoperability, both in terms of composition of software libraries
> and run-time LD calls, mostly on the write side.
>
> Someone has said earlier on this list, that (software) engineering is
> not science. Well, maybe we should turn it into science then. And use
> it to produce one generic Web API (read-write Linked Data), instead of
> the "API economy" which we currently have.
>
> Basically, Linked Data should have provable semantics. We think we
> have found a declarative way to do it, which actually brings Linked
> Data closer to the original ontology-driven Semantic Web vision. But
> it involves SPARQL, which many Linked Data people seem to have an
> aversion for (yet many of the same people champion JSON, which is an
> immaterial and orthogonal implementation detail in this big picture).
>
> We call the approach Linked Data Templates, and are currently working
> on its semantics. Please take a look:
> https://github.com/AtomGraph/Linked-Data-Templates/blob/mast
> er/XML%20London%202016%20paper/Linked%20Data%20Templates.pdf
>
> Best,
>
>
> Martynas
> atomgraph.com
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 4:24 AM, Timothy Holborn
> <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Melvin / Henry (or TimBL)
> >
> > Can someone ask (or respond) and tell me what the key principles are that
> > TimBL wants to achieve in producing SoLiD (like?) alternatives.
> >
> > What are these key qualities...
> >
> > I imagine he would / could summarise it in a page or so, as he has done
> with
> > other concepts in the past.
> >
> > I do not believe he has a rigid view that SoLiD is the only path for the
> web
> > into the future.  A comment i am reminded of, is one of creating pieces
> and
> > not forcing the everything to be used; but hoping counterparts can and
> will
> > be.
> >
> > I see work that's been done over a VERY long period of time; and i think
> the
> > semantic inferencer that has somehting like HTTP signatures protecting
> > algorithms shared using something like linked-media-fragments to services
> > were people are storing their private and sensitive media objects that
> they
> > want to be processed by algorithms produced by incredible scientists
> around
> > the world - well, that kinda stuff is amongst the 'to-do' list IMHO.
> >
> > TimH>
> >
> > On Wed, 17 Aug 2016 at 09:31 Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 16 August 2016 at 20:23, Kaliya IDwoman <kaliya-id@identitywoman.net
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 5:51 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie
> >>> <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> What is the business case for a service provider to adopt Solid?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 1) first off I'm super skeptical of any project that is
> >>> university/research based it is notoriously difficult to get those to
> escape
> >>> the lab as it where. Everyone has incentive to "publish" for their
> >>> degrees/professorships - zero incentive to make a usable, market
> >>> worthy/ready product (I don't just mean in a business way relative to
> market
> >>> but adoptable in the marketplace of tools and software)
> >>>
> >>> 2) The Personal Data Ecosystem Consortium that I founded in 2010
> >>> http://www.pde.cc has a whole range of companies that have been
> working on
> >>> similar technology and ideas for well over 5 years. So it isn't new -
> the
> >>> ideas around personal data stores/banks etc and putting people at the
> center
> >>> of their own data lives go back at least to Johannes'  Ernst work (See
> the
> >>> top of my twitter for a diagram he drew in 2005-6.  And the Augmented
> Social
> >>> Network White Paper which itself and antecedents in other work.
> >>> http://asn.planetwork.net
> >>>
> >>> 3) Please show me what Tim has lead that has gotten to market besides
> >>> HTML back in the day?
> >>
> >>
> >> Skepticism is healthy.  But can sometimes be overdone.
> >>
> >> Tim didnt just get html to market.  He also created the first browser
> >> (editor).  He created HTTP.  He created.  He created the first web
> server.
> >> And after that he created linked data.  And now Solid.  This is all
> really
> >> one project known as the world wide web.
> >>
> >> Fun fact: when presenting these things to the hypertext conference when
> it
> >> was all working, the paper was rejected from the main conference and
> only
> >> allowed "poster track"
> >>
> >> See:
> >>
> >> https://www.w3.org/2004/Talks/w3c10-HowItAllStarted/?n=16
> >>
> >> Simple fact is that Tim thought about the web for 2 decades before
> >> releasing it.  Almost no one got it then.  Solid is the conclusion of
> that
> >> work, and almost no one gets it now.  My hope is that people will start
> to
> >> appreciate it when they see it in action! :)
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Why would Google, Facebook or anyone that build's their business on
> user
> >>>> data choose to let users take that away?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> They don't have a choice because the European regulatory framework the
> >>> General Data Protection Regulation that comes into force in 2018 is
> >>> mandating it.
> >>> You also have a whole group of companies working on building businesses
> >>> around this premise and one finally finally got funding -
> >>> https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/30/digi-me-bags-6-1m-to-put-
> users-in-the-driving-seat-for-sharing-personal-data/
> >>> Meeco https://meeco.me/ from Australia is doing awesome work (Both
> there
> >>> and in the UK) as is MyDex https://mydex.org/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Who will offer users a comparable service to these silos that attracts
> >>>> them away but adopts Solid and can still make enough money to survive
> >>>> competing with the biggest tech companies in the world?
> >>>>
> >>>> The point is not whether or not the architecture is easy the point is
> >>>> whether it has the potential to make anybody any money because if it
> doesn't
> >>>> then I think you will have a hard time persuading people to use it, no
> >>>> matter how well it scales.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> We have to really get into the weeds of figuring how value flows in
> these
> >>> networks to make it work for the parties involved and be sustainable
> in the
> >>> long run.  It will take way more then "architecture".
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> If you all want to dive into some of the nitty gritty I invite you to
> the
> >>> Internet Identity Workshop - http://www.internetidentityworkshop.org
> >>>
> >>> :) Kaliya
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 15 August 2016 at 14:11, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 15 August 2016 at 14:08, Timothy Holborn <
> timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Solid isn't finished yet.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Solid is at version 0.6 rather than 1.0.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But I dont really know what more can be added to it to get it to
> v1.0.
> >>>>> Im using it on a daily basis and it works fine.  Some people are
> >>>>> perfectionists I suppose :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In any case its IMHO light years ahead of where the rest of the web
> is,
> >>>>> even if you only take small parts of it and use it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You can also argue that solid will never be finished, in the sense
> >>>>> that, the web will never be "finished".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Its definitely something that can be used today.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, 10:07 PM Melvin Carvalho
> >>>>>> <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 15 August 2016 at 11:50, Adrian Hope-Bailie
> >>>>>>> <adrian@hopebailie.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> From the article: "The question is whether architecture will be
> >>>>>>>> enough."
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The answer is no.
> >>>>>>>> We live in world where few ideas succeed without a strong business
> >>>>>>>> case. The architecture is the easy part.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Architecture is deceptively difficult to get right.  The vast
> >>>>>>> majority if systems start to fall over as they scale.  The web and
> REST are
> >>>>>>> two architectures that buck that trend and just get stronger as
> they scale.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Solid is the next evolution in that architectural trend, imho,
> >>>>>>> because it simply embraces the points that made the web great, and
> extends
> >>>>>>> it a little bit, while being 100% backwards compatible.  Right
> now, it's the
> >>>>>>> only system that I know of, with this property, in fact, nothing
> else is
> >>>>>>> close.  So this in itself, the ability to scale to billions of
> users, is a
> >>>>>>> business case.  Quietly facebook adopted the social graph approach
> to the
> >>>>>>> web, and web architectural principles with their graph protocol,
> and also an
> >>>>>>> implementation of WebID.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I think what's true is that few ideas succeed, because simply, we
> >>>>>>> have a lot of ideas and a lot of competition.  Having a business
> can help,
> >>>>>>> but the right architecture is the magic sauce to get through those
> >>>>>>> scalability barriers.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I personally think Solid is the business opportunity of a lifetime,
> >>>>>>> perhaps even bigger than the first web.  Im certainly investing on
> that
> >>>>>>> basis.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 14 August 2016 at 10:49, Timothy Holborn
> >>>>>>>> <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Anders,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'm using this email to respond to both [1] in creds; in addition
> >>>>>>>>> to the below, with some lateral considerations.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> See this video where Mr Gates and Mr Musk are discussing in China
> >>>>>>>>> AI [2].
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I haven't fully considered the implications, whilst i've
> certainly
> >>>>>>>>> been considering the issue; i have not fully considered it, and
> as modern
> >>>>>>>>> systems become subject to government contracts as may be the
> case with
> >>>>>>>>> enterprise solutions such as those vended by IBM [3], may
> significantly
> >>>>>>>>> lower the cost for government / enterprise, in seeking to
> achieve very
> >>>>>>>>> advanced outcomes - yet i'm unsure the full awareness of how
> these systems
> >>>>>>>>> work, what potential exists for unintended outcomes when work by
> >>>>>>>>> web-scientists[4][5] becomes repurposed without their explicit
> and full
> >>>>>>>>> consideration of the original designers for any extended use of
> their works,
> >>>>>>>>> what the underlying considerations are by those who are
> concerned [6][7] and
> >>>>>>>>> how these systems may interact with more advanced HID as i've
> kinda tried to
> >>>>>>>>> describe recently to an audience here [8] and has been further
> discussed
> >>>>>>>>> otherwise [9] [10].
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'm a little concerned about the under-resourcing that seems to
> >>>>>>>>> plague Manu's / Dave's original vision (that included WebDHT) to
> the
> >>>>>>>>> consultative approach that i believed had alot of merit in how
> it may
> >>>>>>>>> interact with the works of RWW at the time (alongside WebID)
> which have al
> >>>>>>>>> progressed, yet, not seemingly to a solution that i think is
> 'fit for
> >>>>>>>>> purpose' in attending to the issues before us.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I have considered the need for people to own their own biometric
> >>>>>>>>> signatures.  I have considered the work by 'mico-project'[11]
> seems to be a
> >>>>>>>>> good supporter of these future works, particularly given the
> manner in which
> >>>>>>>>> these works support LDP and other related technologies...
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> But the future is still unknown, and what worries me most; is
> those
> >>>>>>>>> who know most about A.I. may not be able to speak about it as a
> citizen or
> >>>>>>>>> stakeholder in the manner defined by way of a magna carta, such
> as is the
> >>>>>>>>> document that hangs on my wall when making such considerations
> more broadly
> >>>>>>>>> in relation to my contributory work/s.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> i understand this herein; contains an array of fragments; yet, am
> >>>>>>>>> trying to format schema that leads others to the spot in which
> i'm
> >>>>>>>>> processing broader ideas around what, where and how; progress
> may be
> >>>>>>>>> accelerated and indeed adopted by those capable of pushing it
> forward.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I remember the github.com/Linkeddata team (in RWW years) wrote a
> >>>>>>>>> bunch of things in GO, which is what the IPFS examples showcase,
> and without
> >>>>>>>>> providing exhaustive links, i know Vint has been working in the
> field of
> >>>>>>>>> inter-planetary systems [13], therein also understanding
> previous issues
> >>>>>>>>> relating to JSON-LD support (as noted in [1] or [14] ), which
> in-turn may
> >>>>>>>>> also relate to other statements made overtime about my view that
> some of the
> >>>>>>>>> works incubated by credentials; but not subject to IG or
> potential WG
> >>>>>>>>> support at present - may be better off being developed within
> the WebID
> >>>>>>>>> community as an additional constituent of work that may work
> interoperable
> >>>>>>>>> with WebID-TLS related systems.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Too many Ideas!!!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> (perhaps some have merit...)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Tim.H.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2016
> Aug/0045.html
> >>>>>>>>> [2] https://youtu.be/TRpjhIhpuiU?t=16m26s
> >>>>>>>>> [3] http://blog.softlayer.com/tag/watson
> >>>>>>>>> [4] http://webscience.org/
> >>>>>>>>> [5] https://twitter.com/WebCivics/status/492707794760392704
> >>>>>>>>> [6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV8EOQNYC-8
> >>>>>>>>> [7]
> >>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_on_Artificial_Inte
> lligence
> >>>>>>>>> [8] (perhaps not the best reference, but has a bunch of ideas in
> >>>>>>>>> it:
> >>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1RzczQPfygLuowu-WPvaY
> yKQB0PsSF2COKldj1mjktTs/edit?usp=sharing
> >>>>>>>>> [9] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTqF3w2yrZI
> >>>>>>>>> [10] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x_VpAjim6g
> >>>>>>>>> [11] http://www.mico-project.eu/technology/
> >>>>>>>>> [12] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CMxDNuuAiQ
> >>>>>>>>> [13]
> >>>>>>>>> http://www.wired.com/2013/05/vint-cerf-interplanetary-internet/
> >>>>>>>>> [14] https://github.com/ipfs/ipfs/issues/36
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 at 14:47 Anders Rundgren
> >>>>>>>>> <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 2016-08-11 15:16, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> > Really good article, mentions Solid and other technologies.
> >>>>>>>>>> > WebID is mentioned by the author in the comments too ...
> >>>>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>>>> > http://www.digitaltrends.com/web/ways-to-decentralize-the-we
> b/
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> One of the problems with the Web is that there is no easy way
> >>>>>>>>>> letting a provider know where you come from (=where your Web
> resources are).
> >>>>>>>>>> This is one reason why OpenID rather created more
> centralization.  The same
> >>>>>>>>>> problem is in payments where the credit-card number is used to
> find your
> >>>>>>>>>> bank through complex centralized registers.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Both of these use-cases can be addressed by having URLs + other
> >>>>>>>>>> related data such as keys in something like a digital wallet
> which you carry
> >>>>>>>>>> around.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> There is a snag though: Since each use-case needs special logic,
> >>>>>>>>>> keys, attributes etc. it seems hard (probably impossible),
> coming up with a
> >>>>>>>>>> generic Web-browser solution making such schemes rely on
> extending the
> >>>>>>>>>> Web-browser through native-mode platform-specific code.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Although W3C officials do not even acknowledge the mere
> >>>>>>>>>> existence(!) of such work, the progress on native extensions
> schemes has
> >>>>>>>>>> actually been pretty good:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webappsec/2016Au
> g/0005.html
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> This is approach to decentralization is BTW not (anymore) a
> >>>>>>>>>> research project, it is fully testable in close to
> production-like settings
> >>>>>>>>>> today:
> >>>>>>>>>> https://test.webpki.org/webpay-merchant
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The native extensions also support a
> >>>>>>>>>> _decentralized_development_model_for_Web_technology_,
> something which is
> >>>>>>>>>> clearly missing in world where a single browser vendor has 80%
> of the mobile
> >>>>>>>>>> browser market!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Anders
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
>
>



Received on Monday, 26 September 2016 18:04:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 26 September 2016 18:04:03 UTC