W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rww@w3.org > April 2021

Re: Temporal Stack

From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 23:04:29 +1000
Message-ID: <CAM1Sok2mmdVUXMoH-YL_KthGJnavopZM55rvPSUruvzVRpk9mQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com>
Cc: public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>
oh, fwiw:

image is:
as is also noted:


But a problem did crop-up, where the date of 2013 (linked also to
of the same year),

that date, is really important to me...

its a very different thing creating something vs. copying something, or
building upon other people's work. There are many use cases where this is
of vital importance for democracies, society, and life without war /
violence...  but it is indeed an ideology in nature; that the web hasn't
been able to sort out. yet.  IMO.

a document of mine
from 2012...

https://www.google.com/search?q=filetype%3Apdf+site%3Adig.csail.mit.edu is
useful.  there's one, that i think was made in the 00's leading to:
https://timeline.knightlab.com/  which could ideally have a better tool
that could be employed rather than using a spreadsheet (imo).


On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 at 22:37, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>

> Heya,
> (I note the other posts by Sebastian,  trying to minimise my response.)
> I find the HTTP tags useful.  examples being:
> http://mediaprophet.org/ux_KB/page4115294.html#0 &
> http://dev.webcivics.org/ (use dummy data to get past the form, and note,
> melvin did something similar prior to my producing an example)...
> note also: drawing (and comments):
> https://twitter.com/SailingDigital/status/1383022781722361862
> I find in portals, the timestamps provided change.  in one case, i made a
> video first published christmas day 2016 https://2017.trustfactory.org/
> (that's what i did on that day) and as a consequence of my changing the
> publishing settings on youtube -
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9vROTibKiE it now gives a date of 2020.
> these sorts of 'decisions' have impacts that relate to intellectual
> property & law. (alongside dignity and other 'human' factors, etc.)
> On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 at 23:50, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 21 Mar 2021 at 13:37, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> had a think.  thought i'd post it.
>>> IMO there's cause to build into WWW / HTTP a method to support temporal
>>> lookups, other than simply using archive.org.   i imagine this would
>>> eventually require ICANN, IETF (etc) support; amongst other implications.
>>> The functional outcome would be an ability to look up a page at a
>>> particular date.   This may involve differences in who owned the domain
>>> name at that time (vs. who may own it later on), amongst many other
>>> implications.  There would have to be a 'format' of 'standards' around how
>>> to achieve it, for long-term support.
>>> Foundational requirements, prior to more easily engaging CMS providers
>>> such as Wordpress / automattic, drupal, etc.  would be to define a simple
>>> concept that could be built upon to do it.  I imagine it may take some
>>> years to do, and i'm not entirely sure i'm up for it - historically no
>>> funding for work by civics persons (civilians, working independent of
>>> contract / employment revenue) for doing W3C works; maybe, with new changes
>>> that might be reviewed; but regardless,
>>> cost of storage, etc. has been dropping.  I'm not sure what the economic
>>> model for it would be, but i can think of a variety of ways a solution that
>>> attends to the economic implications could be forged.  I also think, an
>>> evaluation may lead to an outcome where it's able to be understood how to
>>> do it at a lower energy cost than simply employing DHTs / Blockchains
>>> ("DLTs"), although the file-system layer may be considered independently,
>>> atm, idk; and don't really want to make the point any more complicated than
>>> it needs to be for now.
> I'm very mindful of https://www.google.com/search?q=httpa+filetype%3Apdf
> and whilst http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://dig.csail.mit.edu/ is
> really useful, i'm troubled by whether and/or how people get the
> acknowledgement they may deserve; and/or how others are able to find the
> people, whose creative minds were most involved in thinking out problems.
> therein also; i'm very mindful of your work (melvin) on linked-data based
> (low-energy) ledger works.
> was your old site: https://web.archive.org/web/2018*/webpayments.org ???
> i can't find it..  maybe i'm wrong?  doesn't appear to be the case, when i
> look at old emails...
>> A lot depends on the use case
>> The web as a distributed document system isnt really designed to do
>> time.  Most people I know that have used web standards to work with time
>> have run into varying degrees of complexity issues
>> You can rely on a trusted third party like archive.org or try and create
>> a system where you can ask for older copies of a page, which handles some
>> use cases
>> many years ago, there was an Australian man who claimed he had a
> compression method that could get media down to something like 27.6Kbps.
> resolution back then was low. lots of implications at the time, most bad.
> the 'proof' is apparently
> http://web.archive.org/web/20100816065731/http://www.adamsplatform.com.au/Documents/CoreTechnology%20&%20Diagrames/Matlab%20&%20Other%20Data%20Files.zip
> but that doesn't exist.
> We do rely upon archive.org but there's a bunch of stuff it can't do...
> i also note, the issue becomes more complex (imo) with ontologies. (and
> dead links, etc.).
>> A block chain, which was originally called a time chain, is designed to
>> store small amounts of data as a time series, and if distributed provides
>> resilience through replication.  This is generally considered strong enough
>> for financial grade transactions without relying on a trusted third party.
>> However many such chains are really a "please buy my token" scheme, pitched
>> to an unsophisticated user/investor base.
>> In most cases archive.org or something similar would handle the need to
>> time travel through many documents.  Time traveling through a financial
>> ledger (to prove there was no fraud) generally requires stronger
>> assurances, which is where the security of a block chain comes in
>> The ability to use a time / block chain to provide assurances about the
>> web over time, could have some use cases, when the proof of non tampering
>> of the data is important, or when you might want to reconstruct the
>> history.  Or if one site goes away you might want a permanent record that
>> could be taken forward by another party
> if there's interest in figuring stuff out, happy to help.  there are
> use-cases linked to other fields where reconstruction of a 'view' of
> history (re: permissions) does need to be altered (for good purpose) but
> this then, goes into the permissions stuff; which also links across to
> other stuff.
> delete a 'friend', it's not like you never knew them; or that works done
> together, was only done by one member and not the other.
> domestic (or web) violence relationship, need to change your name; well,
> that shouldn't be at the expense of the victim.  the old 'evidence stuff',
> should still be stored in a manner useful for a court of law.
> laws change?  well, law only applies in the format of how it was described
> at the time the alleged offence took place.
> https://www.theknightstemplar1119.org/post/the-knights-templar-and-the-founding-of-the-temple-inns
> I found the words 'remember all those who have fallen for the greater
> good' from: https://www.knights-templars-albion.com/our-oath
> links to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Church#1185%E2%80%931307
> History  / provenance is important to distinguish good actors, from the
> bad ones (who are often professionals in the field of being, a bad actor);
> and therein also, who we promote in society to further our interests
> towards a world that we want best, for children to thrive within.
> Yet therein; the problem most-often is, that when wrongs are committed;
> its often about something that's worthless.  The legitimate means to
> resolve the problem, in the end, is to prosecute after wealth has been
> created as a consequence of works that may relate to behaviours that
> warrant review by a court of law.
> some cases may incorporate 'lived experiences' or evidence related
> materials that extend over decades.
> therein some of my considerations noted (although there's much earlier
> links / materials i have about it)
> https://medium.com/webcivics/permissioned-commons-7fc33a1ce23e
> <https://medium.com/webcivics/permissioned-commons-7fc33a1ce23e>
> https://medium.com/webcivics/tech-for-permissive-commons-c0961b77249e
> <https://medium.com/webcivics/tech-for-permissive-commons-c0961b77249e>
>> What would be needed for standardization between a DLT and the web would
>> be a bridge layer between the identifiers on the web (in the strongest
>> sense URIs), and cryptographic primitives
>> So it would just be like the regular history, but more trustable.  It
>> would be helpful to have a use case for this, if you want standardization
>> or someone to build it
> I think we'd need some 'civic' sponsors to assist with the 'civics'
> activity to get it done.  https://digi.vatlib.it/ is an old example of a
> 'knowledge trust' or 'bank', maybe archive.org is another; but maybe
> also, there's a way to build the capability into the web.  much like DNS.
> perhaps requiring a specified format (a bit like LTS versions of OSs,
> etc.).
> I'll have a bit more of a think about it; but if its only me thinking this
> sort of stuff is important, i don't know how useful time being put towards
> solving this problem as part of a future knowledge-fabric, would end-up
> with a good outcome.  I do not see the major barriers being technical in
> nature, fwiw.  but, i don't see how policy experts could solve it, without
> technical experts (who do not have encumbrances via contractual
> relationships, ie: for employment, etc.) putting forward the argument, and
> thereafter developing it; which is a non-trivial task.
>>> Timothy Holborn
> working on a thing atm, that's intended to provide a place for people to
> tell stories, fiction (or so classified) about how the COVID-19 'pandemic',
> how 'it's all going to end'; which i think, means when there's peace,
> amongst other factors.  planning on using the old webizen thing to do so.
> imo; the outcome, irrespective of what happens between now and then; will
> be a knowledge age, figuring out what actually happened in a way that's
> stored in a manner that can be accepted as evidence in a court of law; is
> going to be part of the outcome, the only thing that's seemingly 'up in the
> air' is about permissions. AFAIK.
Received on Friday, 16 April 2021 13:05:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 16 April 2021 13:05:22 UTC