future of ~the internet~

lol

basically i dont see how the history of the internet up till now which has been 'liberating content' switches to 'locking down content' is all - at least present a plausible narrative where users would be cool w/giving up their freedom/free stuff

if i'm trying to figure out how to beat apple i want to build a faster machine with even more apps and maybe at a lower price. that's the future.

― HOOStory is back. Fasten your steenbelts. (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Thursday, February 24, 2011 6:20 PM (58 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

lmao its funny cause its quite literally 'the past'

just means im advanced, from the future

― ice cr?m, Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:18 PM (35 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

ok, prove it. surprise us all.

^^^ doesn't follow ice cr?m on twitter

doesn't do twitter

or should i?

anyway i posted a condensed version of my argument a few posts back - i apologize for being incomprehensible - that bothers me too - like i was literally complaining to myself abt tombots posts being willfully cryptic while i wrote that lol

it must be an age thing, i'm out

future of the internet - ppl still bitching at each other.

It's a senior thing - you wouldn't understand

i look forward to the day where i can outright murder someone over the internet and order a pizza w/one click

I don't like murder, i'm out

hold on ok, this should just take 5 mins

fuck off

dude what

wtf

hey i apologise if i've got in the way of some useful discussion on this thread.

you have been kinda inexplicably hostile

A: http://futureoftheinternet.org/

sputtering
on a path to a lockdown
unsettling new kinds of control
“tethered appliances”
holocaust tattoos
Google mash-ups
made up word is at risk
the Borg
lost opportunity
netizens

you're welcome

also
http://www.bruceeisner.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/08/26/future_internet.jpg

thats me right now

you've shaved

future shave

lol @ future of the internet book exposing the view im arguing against, no respect

i did notice that but it sounds like it is prob a terrible POS so you are still on solid ground. also, the guy's name is Zit Train and he draws attention to it by having his name on railway tracks. someone at his vanity publisher obv hates him.

hahahahaha

I'd say that the idea of devices being "locked-in" -- which is complete bullshit because we're more cloud/web app dependent now than ever -- isn't all that important in the long term. If anything, the breadth of devices available now is ridiculous. Instead of having one device that is easily modified and expanded (PC), we have computers in everything and they're all able to futz around with data and communication in different modes.

http://searchengineland.com/google-forecloses-on-content-farms-with-farmer-algorithm-update-66071

I am doing this twitter thing, who's with me

future of ~the internet~ depends on it

whats ur handle

handsofthedevil

Following u. You'd better be good so that the two times I month I actually remember to check it aren't big disappointments. Don't let me down here E3.

yah youre in the spotlight, on deck circle, got my eyes on you

PRESSURE

dag yo

basically i dont see how the history of the internet up till now which has been 'liberating content' switches to 'locking down content' is all - at least present a plausible narrative where users would be cool w/giving up their freedom/free stuff

app stores are cool, the OS provider is the ultimate middleman/arbiter of content, generally speaking people seem more than happy to hand over the keys? This is the trend I see.

I like your point about liberation vs control. I think both have been pretty strong drivers for internet activity - if there wasn't some temporarily satisfying illusion or promise of control then the degree of investment we have today probably wouldn't have happened. On second thought compared to my first argument above, there are pretty strong points to be made for the pendulum trending in either direction at the moment - apps/hulu on the one hand, wikileaks/anonymous on the other.

I personally have worries about increasing segregation between phone ppl and freebsd ppl but frankly that is the kind of concern only I have, and the truth is those two demographics are closer to one another in how they use computers today than they ever have been.

Maybe if people start making more apps that make it easier to set up and manage your own cloudiddy content/service that's not necessarily tied to somebody else's branded packaging and distribution scheme (not that there aren't a few already, I guess) I'll be pretty convinced. Maybe I'll see if I can put a tumblr authorin' app on grandma's ipad and fool around with it.

sort of an update: all the twitter/tumblr apps for iOS devices seem just designed for one-way blathering and seemed really poorly suited for content liberation theology

but then again letting even more of everyone have a fairly cheap broadcasting platform is still a step closer to where we think we ought to be, even if that broadcasting platform does ostensibly belong to a device vendor, an app developer, an ISP/phone service and some semi-describable funny-named content distribution service before it belongs to you

http://theinternetwishlist.com/

This is a collection of ideas for apps and websites people are wishing for.

Think of it like a suggestion box for the future of technology.

If you’d like to contribute, simply post an idea on Twitter and include #theiwl in your tweet.

standalone apps will not be the future:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/11/apps_are_not_the_future/

If you’d like to contribute, simply post an idea on Twitter and include #theiwl in your tweet.

Somehow I doubt this is the future of the Internet: http://moodfish.com/

That Reg piece is dreck. bojennet otm in comments.

I started an album based on the concept of markers to deter inadvertent human intrusion, I keep meaning to get back to that...

http://downlode.org/Etext/WIPP/

whoops

In the future, the internet's massively interactive computing and information sharing capacity will enable humans to both form and expose conspiracies with breathtaking speed.

http://www.slate.com/id/2289342/

So in another vein let me share my automobile analogy a bit

we're like 30 years in to the history of the personal computer - rounding up, but not really, 20 years in to the Internet

now 30 years in to cars, you still have all the major manufacturers within 50 miles of one another. More importantly, they only really have to compete with one another, and nobody gives a fuck about safety

it wasn't until the late 50s or so (~40 years of mass automotive growth and adoption), with overseas competitors like Volvo leading the way, that anybody cared about safety features, and even then it took leverage from insurance companies to get American manufacturers to take it seriously

Massive adoption of seatbelt laws and legislative requirements for things like airbags are really recent developments, overall; it's relatively terrifying to think about how many years people spent behind the wheel of what we would now consider deathtraps, although it's important to consider that traffic wasn't nearly as bad for most of those years (less humans around, and certainly a lot fewer cars on the road)

Computers and the Internet ostensibly should adapt to the circumstances at a much faster rate, given the speed of adoption and the population of users, but:

- seriously, there's like four companies driving the bus: apple, adobe, google and microsoft, MAYBE two of which have half-decent patching programs, summed together, so I guess that's like saying if one of them was rock solid, or if they were all .25 of the way there (the latter seems accurate)

- nobody is getting killed or even filing claims for losses against these companies, so there's no reason for insurance brokers to bother stepping in to prove a point

On the other hand, car accidents happen because of driver errors and random chance/malfunction; Internet shit happens because of those same kinds of things PLUS common, outright malfeasance. Should I feel better because we're right in line with the auto industry's slow crawl towards safer engineering, or worse, because while we're not actually killing people outright, we're still making everything more difficult and risky than it has to be?

Internet of the future looks like your iphone, not because apps will kill the web, but because the web is a hellhole. Apps and App Stores are service whitelisting at nearly its best; jailbreakers are hot rodding jackasses asking for it on the drag strip (much props though)