Mozilla's pivot to AI first browsing raises fundamental questions about what a browser should be. Waterfox won't include them. The browser's job is to serve you, not think for you.
I think this is just panic from the higher ups at Mozilla who have no idea what in the fuck the company should be doing
It’s not panic, it’s consequence of networking and a very specific culture having formed for CEOs and such.
A bit like Silicon Valley tech bros, they think they are the chosen ones leading the charge and able to make decisions for all of us, sort of aristocracy.
So in their circles it’s fashion now to play this “AI” thing.
And mechanisms to remove those fools from places they don’t belong to and make them clean streets have rotten.
Usable and decentralized - well, you’ll need some beyond-the-horizon planning for how the development of that will go on. Because 90s Web was kinda normal too, except there were future stages.
You need something that’s usable almost from the beginning, but that is also usable for everything you haven’t yet thought about. Something that allows any use, but doesn’t limit any, even needed only by a handful of people, task.
You need universal open infrastructure. Something allowing to pool public service trackers, storage services, relay services, notification services, key services, search services, but tying them into specific applications on the client. Different applications, over the common high-level medium (of authors and messages and groups, for example ; perhaps subscriptions). And you need that to be untrusted and backed up by DHT and sneakernet as perfectly functional alternative ways for the same system. You need them all.
And you need means of development with higher common, basic level. You need something like Hypercard on the clients, so that development in this “alternative Web” were accessible in its full power. With “cards” shared like messages. That’d be similar to how we fetch different websites.
Messages and people and groups would have global identifiers, tied to cryptography. One could have sort of “permission rule” messages to be interpreted by clients to decide, during “replaying” a group with its messages, which action was valid and which wasn’t, and what can this specific user do to the group at this specific moment.
There could be different types of messages, perhaps with references to “interpreter” messages containing scripts.
OK. That’s just a pet dream of mine, but I don’t yet have a full picture in my mind.
It’s not panic, it’s consequence of networking and a very specific culture having formed for CEOs and such.
A bit like Silicon Valley tech bros, they think they are the chosen ones leading the charge and able to make decisions for all of us, sort of aristocracy.
So in their circles it’s fashion now to play this “AI” thing.
And mechanisms to remove those fools from places they don’t belong to and make them clean streets have rotten.
Usable and decentralized - well, you’ll need some beyond-the-horizon planning for how the development of that will go on. Because 90s Web was kinda normal too, except there were future stages.
You need something that’s usable almost from the beginning, but that is also usable for everything you haven’t yet thought about. Something that allows any use, but doesn’t limit any, even needed only by a handful of people, task.
You need universal open infrastructure. Something allowing to pool public service trackers, storage services, relay services, notification services, key services, search services, but tying them into specific applications on the client. Different applications, over the common high-level medium (of authors and messages and groups, for example ; perhaps subscriptions). And you need that to be untrusted and backed up by DHT and sneakernet as perfectly functional alternative ways for the same system. You need them all.
And you need means of development with higher common, basic level. You need something like Hypercard on the clients, so that development in this “alternative Web” were accessible in its full power. With “cards” shared like messages. That’d be similar to how we fetch different websites.
Messages and people and groups would have global identifiers, tied to cryptography. One could have sort of “permission rule” messages to be interpreted by clients to decide, during “replaying” a group with its messages, which action was valid and which wasn’t, and what can this specific user do to the group at this specific moment.
There could be different types of messages, perhaps with references to “interpreter” messages containing scripts.
OK. That’s just a pet dream of mine, but I don’t yet have a full picture in my mind.
I miss HyperCard.