I’ve thought of all these, but what I’m describing should be a comprehensive system in itself and at the same time have global identities and addressing of all content, so that data model could be applied, for example, for a sneakernet or for some situation where you’d have to synchronize data over delay-tolerant networks.

Most of all like Briar or Usenet or something else.

I dunno, the right to bear one arm releasing a grenade is honestly enough

Something is very fucking wrong with people who want to solve our problems this way. Don’t let them pretend this is normal or how this shit should he handled. What the fuck are we doing?

It’s just psychology.

Suppose you are a bunch of pedophiles and murderers making laws.

You don’t want the societal mechanisms against pedophiles and murderers to reach you, but the society has a desire to do to p/ and m/ or against them a certain set of things. So they optimize by doing those things to the opposite part of the society.

The society would want to know what politicians do - they make surveillance against everyone but themselves.

The society would want to thoroughly deal with the pedo problem, preferably IRL where it happens - they direct everything connected to fighting pedos on the communications and the Internet.

The society would want accountability for hierarchy and fewer levers for pressure given to people in important positions, - they make the mandates as fuzzy as possible and create limitations for doing anything outside of hierarchy.

The society would want children to not be taught to obey and fear, and everyone to have privacy, because only in privacy you can say everything you’d want, - they try to turn everything into a surveilled prison camp.

The society would want to be able to answer violence with violence, - they make draconian laws against all kinds of resistance.

The society would want legal clarity, - they try to reduce clarity as much as possible.

It’s basically a bunch of people who should be in jail trying to put in jail everyone else purely out of spite. Who are criminals by too many laws, trying to make legal practice as unpredictable and illogical as possible.

Not a new thing really, like people involved in drugs trade getting into institutions for fighting drugs trade.

When you have a small elite, they don’t need to collude, they just develop a common climate of thought and common understanding of the future.

What pains me to think about - that these people are really brilliant for the most part, those whose names I know. Even Steve Jobs. And they were brilliant still for a few years after getting significant power.

That power still corrupted them, and this amount of “brilliant” is like a whole era, a whole phenomenon of humanity, being proven wrong.

Early 90s Apple is very nice to learn about, and early 90s Microsoft was powerful, but not evil yet, and early 90s Oracle was a really good company. And remember what Google was in its early years, they seemed the front line of the new age of openness and freedom. I won’t say anything good about early Facebook, but apparently it too managed to be good for someone.

So much for corporate propaganda.

Autistic doesn’t equal genius.

Autistic special interest is not about knowing a subject well, it’s about fetish\fixation on that subject ; say, I’ve done a lot of fixing old AfterStep dockapps that don’t compile anymore, or programs from the 90s for X11, to reproduce the vibe of using a Unix-like system then. I still haven’t written a single Linux or FreeBSD driver. I haven’t even written a single Java program. BTW, found the old (Sun-era, judging by the icons and pics there ; old doesn’t mean obsolete for me, I’m fine with simple OOP and don’t need generics or lambdas or such, I know these are cool) “Java Tutorials” on the Oracle site and realized that those are almost as easy to use to make your own simple applications as TCL documentation, except Java is far more powerful (due to ability to use all the Java libraries around). And now I do know what I want to make, so the next weekend might not go in vain.

There’s genius (I dunno, someone like Wernher von Braun), there’s autistic (someone like me or your random strange kid, a real life Asakura Yoh), and there’s autistic genius (multiply the rareness of both and get the probability of a person being that ; I suppose the kinds of genius to make rare notable achievements are usually both, but not always).

Why do people having nothing at all to do with Tolkien’s values pick up his names?

It is similar to why cowards like to talk about honor?

They sometimes are in normal schools, just under pseudonyms or not aiming for too much attention.

Of course you’re right to be sure of that. Their wife, however, or their school buddy…

I just hope your constitution protects drone rights.

The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a drone swarm is a good guy with a drone swarm.

Murrka yippekayeee mothafucka or something like that (never been on that continent).

It is. It’s like the medieval Sound Toll, you can’t measure it well enough because there are no trade routes between the Baltic and the North Sea other than the Sound, the Kiel channel is not yet a thing.

The business customer who actually pays for the development.

Then it’s my duty as a responsible customer to not make it profitable for them, as much as I can.

Maybe if you can’t use the web without disabling JS, you shouldn’t?

Suppose I can use the Web with JS disabled. Just that page won’t be part of my Web.

Yes, of course when the optimization work has been done for you, it’s the easiest.

It’s an old discussion about monopolies, monocultures, standards, anti-monopoly regulations, where implicit consent is a thing and where it isn’t, and how to make free market stable.

That can’t be fixed. We can’t wait for a different kind of human (what if it’ll be an artificial psychopath anyway) to fix our current thing.

So hard to disrupt means of organizing (for associations, unions and such, unofficial) and building electoral systems (for Internet communities even, why not) are needed ; social media gave people a taste of that to lure them before subverting it all, but the idea is good.

Some sort of a global system. When it’s in place, improvement around will follow.

It’s also pleasant for the brain, to think of a website in terms of resources/locations and variables. Only what a GET request needs.

All those complaints - they are in essence about herds of web developers who get paid to do roughly the same work again and again, and use frameworks upon frameworks to not get depressed from that. And complain that if they’d do that stupid work thoroughly, they’d kill themselves.

Gemini protocol taken as it is probably isn’t enough for commercial purposes, but the part about simple markdown-like pages and only determining semantics of style by the page creator, not how it will be displayed, - it’s correct IMHO. Let the user pick the theme or the CSS stylesheet they prefer to display text, like with e-books. Let the service present structure.

(Except I think gemtext not allowing tables is a mistake.)

That also means that all kinds of validation and blinking buttons and such won’t have to be implemented by web developers.

It’s encouraged to use things with a supply chain easily poisoned.

There’s the issue of a Heisenberg effect here - when a spectator is present, like a huge audit of something, nothing happens, and when a spectator isn’t present, there’s nobody to look every day in piles of constantly changed crap to detect if something happens.

Also not even easily poisoned, but easily denied. It’s about control. The militaries and producers of complex industrial equipment were the first to start doing this, however nuts that may seem. It’s useful to sell your allies a system they can use, but only when allowed. Or sell industrial equipment that can’t be smuggled to a third country without your permission.

These things - they are legal even morally, but at some point in discussion of them common good might arise as a thing in itself, separate from morality. For the common good such systems of control are clear poison.

So - the situation is understood, but the question arises, what does this have in common with a global hypertext system for communication.

Maybe all this functionality should be removed into a kind of plugin, similarly to how it was done with Flash and Java applets and other ancient history. Maybe sandboxed, yes.

Maybe the parts of that kind of plugin relating to DOM, to execution, to interfaces should be standardized.

Maybe such a page should look more like a LabView control model or like a Hypercard application, than what there is now.

One huge benefit would be that Google goes out of business.

The business customer or the visitor?

The visitor doesn’t exactly have a way to give feedback on whether they’d use a static page.

Stuff like file uploads, validated forms and drag and drop are just not worth the effort of providing them without JS.

Honestly many of today’s frameworks allow you to compile the same thing for the Web, for Java for Android, for Java for main desktop OS’es and whatever else.

Maybe if it can’t work like a hypertext page, it shouldn’t be one.

This has to be fixed though. I don’t know, how, but it’s an economic situation bringing enormous damage every moment.

And most of people it affects are, like me, in countries where real political activism is impossible.

This is the next thing that should be somehow resolved like child labor, 8-hour workdays, women’s voting rights and lead paint. Interoperability and non-adversarial standards of the global network.

I would say the future is in pooling resources.

Like it happens with torrents. As one p2p protocol very successful.

Self-hosting not applications, but storage and uniform services. Let different user applications use the same pooled storage and services.

All services are ultimately storage, computation, relays, search&indexing and trackers. So if there’s a way to contribute storage, computing resources, search and relay nodes by announcing them via trackers (suppose), then one can make any global networked application using that.

But I’m still thinking how can that even work. What I’m dreaming of is just year 2000 Internet (with FTP, e-mail, IRC, search engines), except simplified and made for machines, with the end result being represented to user by a local application. There should be some way to pay for resources in a uniform way, and reputation of resources (not too good if someone can make a storage service, collect payment, get a “store” request and then just take it offline), or it won’t work.

And global cryptographic identities.

Not like Fediverse in the end, more like NOSTR.

I mean, such things can be false flags. It wouldn’t make sense, the Confederates were much weaker strategically and knew it.

There’s a counterpoint to that. In real hard truth, nobody is anonymous and creative handles can be traced back to a name easily.

But having pseudonyms affects human psychology. And makes people post things they wouldn’t want to be traced to them. And do things.

There was a time when it seemed that everything is insecure. That time didn’t end. Just with HTTPS everywhere and encrypted everything and with glossy appearances people have genuinely lost all understanding of the real world.

They think, metaphorically, that if there’s no name written on their door, everyone who asks can’t learn who they are.