Re: operating-system or co-operating systems? Re: Coherent (modern) definition of RWW

first one i tried to make (2000-2), i called it a 'network based operating
system' or basedrive network operating system -
http://webcivics.org/Basedrive.html

Consciousness  'status of the observer', its all kinda temporal... but
societies have employed the notion of 'common sense' to curate 'courts of
law' for a very long time.

For now, keeping my reply short;  few links,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYPjXz1MVv0&list=PLCbmz0VSZ_voTpRK9-o5RksERak4kOL40&index=4&t=1s
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYPjXz1MVv0&list=PLCbmz0VSZ_voTpRK9-o5RksERak4kOL40&index=4&t=1s>

https://medium.com/webcivics/theoretical-relationship-between-social-informatics-systems-and-quantum-physics-reality-check-6ce3781d1a29
https://medium.com/webcivics/the-semantic-inforg-the-human-centric-web-reality-check-tech-50e2fa124ed4

in anycase; i think this discovery process is going well.  lots to plug
together into an insights document thing
(probably try to do so next week?  i assume, more will develop that can be
packaged into any such form of milestone thing).

Timothy Holborn


On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 17:55, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote:

>
>
> > On 19. May 2021, at 07:36, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> >>
> >> Hi Timothy,
> >>
> >> FWIW -- A Read-Write Web is simply an Entity Relationship Graph (Graph
> for short), constructed from hyperlinks, that supports Create, Update, and
> Delete operations -- in one form or another.
> >>
> >> Fundamentally, you can add, alter, and remove parts from said graph.
> >>
> >> Web 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 themed technologies have offered the above in
> various forms with associated consequences re:
> >>
> >> 1. Interaction Flexibility & Inflexibility  via Application or Service
> Experience
> >>
> >> 2. User Privacy
> >>
> >> 3. Society at large .
> >>
> >> Personally, I don't fixate on perfect definitions or "one size fits
> all" world views. I prefer to simply get stuff done by implementing
> relevant open standards are various Super Set oriented entry points (*
> which may not always be obvious initially *).
> >>
> >> In conclusion:
> >>
> >> Let's crack on with getting stuff done since we have all the open
> standards and specs in place. Basically, write stuff, share it with others
> to test interop.
>
> +1000 to learning by practice.
> These sometimes though do lead people to stumble on philosophical or
> mathematical problems
>
> >
> > The more the do that the better for item #3 which I know you care a lot
> about :)
> >
> >
> > So I think you could view the web as a giant state machine.  And writing
> to the web is changing that state machine
>
> So here you have to be very careful. It may be a lot more correct to state
> that the web is an open ended set
> of state machines in communication with one another. This moves you to the
> actor model of computation.
> Carl Hewitt who developed that model wrote up a very readable history
> which I link to from here
> https://twitter.com/bblfish/status/1358103100104572930
>
> > So the potential of a read write web is to create a web scale operating
> system, which is something we've not yet seen
>
> Operating Systems tend to be thought of as systems to control 1 machine -
> a computer, phone, watch, etc…
> When dealing with many machines I think it is therefore better to think
> not of an operating system but
> instead of co-operating systems.
>
> > I may be wrong here, but I think that all operating systems rely on a
> clock
> >
> > Now imagine if the clock was internal to any one process (think server),
> that would not make sense for an operating system
>
>
> You can indeed also have synchronized clocks.
> The If-Modified-Since and If-Unmodified-Since http headers rely on that.
>
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/If-Modified-Since
>
> >
> > An external clock that you can hook into brings us one step closer to an
> read write, standards based, operating system for the web.  This could be
> done both with server side apps, which now become just agents, and also
> with client side apps, you could imagine a user interface changing
> dynamically over time, perhaps evn democratically.  Lots of nice
> side-effects drop out of this
> >
> > It goes without saying that all of these changes should be 100%
> backwards compatible with what exists, so that it augments, rather than
> replaces
>
> Synchronised clocks are an indeed important part in all read-write web
> protocols for HTTP from WebDav, Atom to LDP.
> So that is already how the RWW works.
>
> The danger of thinking in terms of Operating Systems is that it leads you
> to the dreams of global consensus.
> But as we see with bitcoin, the selection of the next state of the bitcoin
> state machine, is extremely
> costly in energy. As a result over 50% of bitcoin mining is now going on
> in China, and is very far from
> the decentralised dream people had 10 years ago.
>
> Furthermore not every application lends itself well to such a state
> machine, It can work for purely
> mathematically based systems like currencies where the whole state can be
> verified by everyone, but
> it gets a lot more complicated for empirical statements, where semantics
> becomes important. I wrote
> some thoughts on that up here:
>
> https://medium.com/cybersoton/identity-as-a-graph-or-a-chain-f15940beec81
>
> The blockchain is distributed but not decentralised: it requires one view
> of the truth.
>
> In democracies we need to take into account the multi-perspectival nature
> of reality.
> There may be one truth - as an ideal - but that can only be attained by
> discussions among
> incompatible, often contradictory views of reality. That is why a
> multi-agent system
> is the right place to start thinking about these things. Local consensus
> first, global consensus
> later, perhaps and only if needed.
>
>
>
> Henry Story
>
> https://co-operating.systems
> WhatsApp, Signal, Tel: +33 6 38 32 69 84‬
> Twitter: @bblfish
>
>