Could Tim Berners-Lee's Web 3.0 solve the ills of the internets current iteration?

[El Presidente]

3 hours ago, 99call said:

 I don't accept it, I think it's tragic, and depressing that this is what the marketplace has become. 

I agree with you. Unfortunately that ship has sailed. 

There are half-hearted govt attempts here to put the genie back in the bottle but - 1. The tech companies move way faster than govt and - 2. The majority of the population don't want to lose their FB/TT. They say they want changes but when push comes to shove, polling shows they would rather have it as is rather than lose it altogether. 

[99call]

2 hours ago, El Presidente said:

I agree with you. Unfortunately that ship has sailed. 

There are half-hearted govt attempts here to put the genie back in the bottle but - 1. The tech companies move way faster than govt and - 2. The majority of the population don't want to lose their FB/TT. They say they want changes but when push comes to shove, polling shows they would rather have it as is rather than lose it altogether.  

I agree with you. If you address it like putting a genie back in a bottle, then it seems impossible. But if you addressed it in a different way, i.e. a free carve out, opt in service (which it currently is), where people like myself chose to have my (future data). Even if it was only 10% of the population, then it's still not to be sniffed at for willing suppliers to that 10%, I think it could gain traction over time. Especially with younger generations that rightly feel disenfranchised from lots of their freedoms and privacy. If the user experience was an improved one, then it would of course happen very quickly. 

[El Presidente]

2 hours ago, 99call said:

I agree with you. If you address it like putting a genie back in a bottle, then it seems impossible. But if you addressed it in a different way, i.e. a free carve out, opt in service (which it currently is), where people like myself chose to have my (future data). Even if it was only 10% of the population, then it's still not to be sniffed at for willing suppliers to that 10%, I think it could gain traction over time. Especially with younger generations that rightly feel disenfranchised from lots of their freedoms and privacy. If the user experience was an improved one, then it would of course happen very quickly.

Perhaps. Would you be willing to pay a subscription fee of say $10 a month for the "opt out" clause?

Why should the tech businesses provide people a service for free? 

Seems fair all around. 

 

[Puros Y Vino]

The pod thing is interesting. But will social media apps play along? TBD. They won't want to give up their data feeds. The Web ID thing is like the mark of the beast among power users.😁. This setup seems too complex for most of the older generations who can barely manage email. They'll fall off to the wayside in the new Internet and rely on the old one. It's well known that most people do not want to pay for most services online. So the Faustian bargains with the big players will persist.  

Pandora's box is long since open data is out there, whether you like it or not. The best way to safeguard your privacy is to not participate or severely limit what you divulge. Back in the late 90's I got to see some hardcore surveillance systems in action. I imagine the capabilities are far more effective with today's tech.  

[99call]

1 hour ago, El Presidente said:

 Perhaps. Would you be willing to pay a subscription fee of say $10 a month for the "opt out" clause?

Why should the tech businesses provide people a service for free? 

Seems fair all around.  

That to me sounds like trying to augment a adapt a structure that we should actually just totally rebuild. If it was the only choice, yes I would totally pay a monthly fee for my privacy and data to be untouched.  However, it goes back to what I was talking about earlier. If it's buying an online product since when did we accept the transaction was cash AND data in exchange for the product, not just cash?

I don't use many online services, but if I did, yes if it's something I value, I would gladly pay for it. The platform however, i.e. the internet, was given to us free of charge my TBL, access to the internet should be a free basic human right. The services on the internet...YouTube etc, yes by all means get rid of all the adverts and charge a subscription. 

The purpose for the internet, was to communicate, to collaborate, to learn etc etc, not an influence machine that seeks to coerce and take advantage of it's users.

[99call]

1 hour ago, El Presidente said:

Why should the tech businesses provide people a service for free? 

Incidently, it seems Solid are offering these PODS for free (which I'm trying to get my head around signing up to today).

 

[El Presidente]

1 hour ago, 99call said:

That to me sounds like trying to augment a adapt a structure that we should actually just totally rebuild.  

But the easiest one to implement. What's the saying? "Don't let perfect get in the way of good." 

1 hour ago, 99call said:

If it was the only choice, yes I would totally pay a monthly fee for my privacy and data to be untouched. 

So would I.

1 hour ago, 99call said:

It goes back to what I was talking about earlier. If it's buying an online product  since when did we accept the transaction was cash AND data in exchange for the product, not just cash?

You visit an online store. That store pays online rent/shopify etc. Why do we believe we have a right to use that store solely on our terms? Hell, 90% of the time folk could just hop in a car, go find parking, walk into that store or affiliates or similar, pay cash, walk out and privacy secure. They generally don't however. 

In terms of online stores, we are walking into their house, their rules. We should make some attempt to understand the total transaction.  If we don't like it we walk out.

In the event you go to buy this special item of the moment. You are in the throes of want/need. 

Go to checkout and the popup arrives. 

"You acknowledge that your data may be shared with associated third parties to better tailor your future experiences. " Something similar. 

What % of the population tick "I AGREE". 

I am guessing 90% +? 

[99call]

1 hour ago, El Presidente said:

"You acknowledge that your data may be shared with associated third parties to better tailor your future experiences. " Something similar. 

What % of the population tick "I AGREE". 

I am guessing 90% +? 

Knowing that people can be too lazy or busy to stop in a moment and think harder about what they are doing...is one thing...to be willingly to take advantage of it is another. We can't keep on wondering why the moral fabric around us is in tatters, if we don't connect it to decency in everything we do. Like we discussed before that great line, "The standard you walk past is the standard you accept". 

There are lots of open goals we will come into contact in out lives, many of them are no-brainers, and do not call your personal ethical standards into question. And you rightly put the ball in the back of the net. The modern mentality however has become...any open goal must be converted, any advantage must be leveraged, right or wrong. To me, that's bullshit. I would forgo the extra money as a business owner and choose to have my personal ethics in tact. 

As you rightly talked about before, if the pair of trainers is £75 with loads of nonsense profiling attached and unwanted marketing, and nuisance phone calls etc,  I'd rather pay £85 for those trainers and for them to cut the s**t. We agree on that.