It is out of your hands now, and the domains mean nothing anymore.

It was good while it lasted, but it is gone.

The horse has been gone so long it's died of old age.

> and bears little resemblance to the democratic force for humanity he intended.

I remember visiting Tim's website, at CERN, at the dawn of the web.

Today's web bear little resemblance to it in any way shape or form.

But good ideas are common. The question is whether it'll get implemented and used by enough nations to make a difference.

If the EU adopts this, which is possible as there's a pressure to move away from the US, then there's a real possibility that it'll make a difference. But one nation isn't nearly enough to push things over the tipping point. Especially with the UK and US governments determined to destroy privacy and internet security.

The internet is a public place. What you do there is public. The whole world can watch while you do. It is designed that way, and there's nothing that can change that.

He can come up with whatever pods he wants, with the user having absolutely control over how it's used. But he can't control what everyone else observes in that public place, and what they do with it. Advertising companies like Google and Meta will still surveille everything they possibly can (which is, increasingly, everything ), collect every byte available, subject it all to their algorithms, and sell advertising based on it.

And once those massive databases exist in private hands, governments can, and will, compel those companies to fork it over for whatever purpose they choose, be it criminal investigation or political oppression or genocide. That is the inherent nature of government.

The only way for the user to opt out is to not be on the internet, which is increasingly crippling in today's world, because the user has no role in what happens in that public place other than just being there to be spied on.

Why do you think IPv6 has gone nowhere? IPv4 and CGNAT is the most recent method of blocking participation. You still need to access a server from a major company to do anything.

It's hard to find people with Tim Berners-Lee's integrity. We should 'own' our own lives. It's a lot deeper than just being watched.

hoopla about creating a super-intelligence, has no one seen the movie space odyssey 2001? Do you know what happened to the astronauts?

Last time we tried this, god was good enough to destroy it. Second time, fuck it, god said.

...not at the top, making decisions with executives, but customer facing, as an Apple Genius or CSR on the phone for Comcast. I won't take any of this crap seriously until he's had some time working with the general public, and helping them understand technology as it currently exists, forced to have five times more patience than most of the people he'll interact with...because then, and ONLY then, will he have enough understanding to figure out how we got here, and what the costs will be.

> Since Berners-Lee's disappointment a decade ago

I've been disappoi

Secure backpacks for the information trail?

I didn't bother reading the article, but I did do something else: I looked up "Solid protocol" and tried to see what it is.

Originally I compared this to ATproto, but according to [1]the Solid website itself [solidproject.org], "Solid is a file system for the Web". And that seems to be about all it does, it provides an API for storing data. It has mechanisms for handling encryption keys, meaning that in theory whoever runs the "Solid Pod" where your data is stored can't read it. But you've basically created a standardized method of accessing OneDrive or Dropbox or any other number of cloud storage providers at that point.

This feels like a whole bunch of API specifications that simply implement a cloud storage service. Sure, all your data may be in "one place" and in theory you can then download it all and move it somewhere else, but in practice you'd still be accessing it through other services that presumably can read it. Assuming this is supposed to be able to provide social media services, these third parties would still be able to determine what you see, whether for advertising or more nefarious purposes.

Again, [2]from the Solid website [solidproject.org]: "The Solid ecosystem is built on a simple but powerful idea: separating applications from the data they create." Why would applications agree to do that? Even if they do, how you can you be sure they don't save a copy? Even if they don't save a copy, how do you prevent them from using the data that passes through them to track you?

This seems to be a whole lot of added complexity that doesn't really solve anything.

[1] https://solidproject.org/about

[2] https://dev.solidproject.org/guides/building_your_first_solid_app_with_ldo_and_react/

"Berners-Lee traces the web's corruption to the commercialization of the domain name system in the 1990s"

No, the Internet has become what it is due to the unfettered and low barrier to entry that has been provided by "easy" to use terminals.

When the internet was first conceived and established, the barrier to entry was such that the people on the Internet were nerds and geeks. They had a specialized knowledge and with that had an understanding that you used such a resource of interconnected computers to sha

The problem is not that top level domain names were pounced on my charlatans. The problem is that most people have no interest in learning the basic things they need to know to be a self sovereign internet user. I'm thinking specifically of running a mail server and a website. Because of this slight amount of friction, rather than billions of cool quirky web pages we have facebook, gmail, etc. The thing that breaks the internet is that a dearth of self sovereign users leaves a space for companies to frictio

It's been hijacked by AI enshittifcation extremists who neglect the aging Gecko codebase and falling behind the well oiled Chromium machine. I was forced to switch to a Chromium browser after 20+ years since Bugzilla is basically a graveyard of bugs that I have gave up waiting for a fix. Mozilla wasted donators money, and just rolls in Google's monopoly protection money to shove AI where the sun doesn't shine into Firefox.

Then there was the capture of Wikipedia by deletionists who destroy knowledge in order to monetize it on the ad-Heavy fandom.com and for the knowledge they do allow they lock all the controversial knowledge behind "blue locks" that means only the insider clique can edit them.

WWW was just the idea of universal hyperlinks. It's not the internet, and it was never even the web. And, everyone else also had the same idea.

Nothing says you have to use official DNS servers on the internet. Setup an alternate DNS system and run an alt web right along side the commercial web. Or use something like Tor and keep the "dark web" from infiltrating it.

Suggestions like this show a lack of understanding of human nature. Many people do show kindness and consideration for others. But there are, and will always be, those who are motivated to do things that aren't so...nice. You know, people who are motivated by greed to do whatever they can to get more money from people, ranging from pushy sales tactics to outright fraud.

When you live in the country, many people don't bother to lock their doors. Everybody knows everybody else, and they respect the closed door

No one needs web apps, yet he sold us out with stupid new standards that increasingly take the power away from the visitor. Maybe he should add more scripting support into web 4.0 or whatever he wants to call it, that'll fix it.