/prog/ - The Real Story of the World Wide Web

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-15 0:09

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWDPhEvKuRY

Come on... Ted Nelson deserves much more views! maybe Project Xanadu is vaporware, but he is a really smart old man..
On the other side you have timbl who is selling the web to Hollywood lobbies. We should start all this cyberspace and hypertext shit again.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-16 6:01

>>27
Holy shit. His ideas are amazing. Why hasn't anyone made it yet?:
https://youtu.be/w950GgRzbJk?t=8m00s

It's all what >>11,15 said.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-16 6:07

Here is more about the Stand-off markup he referenced:
http://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/Stand-off_markup

Name: BOOBIES! 2013-10-16 6:12

youtu.be/AXlyMrv8_dQ?t=2m11s

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-16 15:34

>>20
Yup, TN is one step of die 9front circlejerk. But at least he created something actually useful!

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-16 18:03

>>31
Did you even read >>22-27? That wasn't even Ted talking, but Gary Wolf, the slime ball of a lifetime.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 0:30

Not bothering to watch his videos. What is his proposal and why does >>28-san think it's so good?

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 0:48

>>33
His "proposal" is this sort of clunky program that allows you to rotate pages in 3D and which highlights shared passages of text. It was arguably a good idea when he came up with it 30 years ago, but for whatever reason he's become very defensive about it. If you watch some of his videos, you'll see that he's quite bitter that people haven't seen the light, and that he refuses to change his program based on suggestions. Notice also that he's apparently gone so far as to disable comments on all his videos. I think that's why he doesn't get any attention.

Name: ‪ 2013-10-17 0:48

>>33

It's all what >>11,15 said.

Can't people read these days, at all?

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 0:50

>>30
That's some great acting there. It's so awkward I almost believe they're real nerds!

Name: ‪ 2013-10-17 0:58

>>34
I guess you also don't know how to read:

Original 17 rules
Every Xanadu server is uniquely and securely identified.
Every Xanadu server can be operated independently or in a network.
Every user is uniquely and securely identified.
Every user can search, retrieve, create and store documents.
Every document can consist of any number of parts each of which may be of any data type.
Every document can contain links of any type including virtual copies ("transclusions") to any other document in the system accessible to its owner.
Links are visible and can be followed from all endpoints.
Permission to link to a document is explicitly granted by the act of publication.
Every document can contain a royalty mechanism at any desired degree of granularity to ensure payment on any portion accessed, including virtual copies ("transclusions") of all or part of the document.
Every document is uniquely and securely identified.
Every document can have secure access controls.
Every document can be rapidly searched, stored and retrieved without user knowledge of where it is physically stored.
Every document is automatically moved to physical storage appropriate to its frequency of access from any given location.
Every document is automatically stored redundantly to maintain availability even in case of a disaster.
Every Xanadu service provider can charge their users at any rate they choose for the storage, retrieval and publishing of documents.
Every transaction is secure and auditable only by the parties to that transaction.
The Xanadu client-server communication protocol is an openly published standard. Third-party software development and integration is encouraged.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Xanadu#Original_17_rules

Standard Draft or Manifesto: http://xanadu.com.au/general/faq.html#2

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 1:28

>>37
Fossil nearly provides all those features. However, I agree with some of the points discussed here:
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?XanaduProject

It was claimed that "Xanadu is completely obsolete as a system since it doesn't take into account such fundamental things as decentralization and authentication. Xanadu shows its decrepitude by being incompatible with PeerToPeer and never mentioning cryptography."

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 2:38

Why do I know how to find them?:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARQL

Name: >>39 2013-10-17 2:40

Oh, here is Xanadu, in W3C:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework

Just ignore the XML clusterfuck from W3C

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 2:53

>>34
1960 was 53 years ago.
>>38
probably the most stupid and tasteless quote in this BBS.

Of course that Xanadu may seems antiquated... C, or EVEN Scheme may seems.. obsolete for young /g/rogramers like you as well.. but if you try to be a bit more clever you will realize that it have many great an solid ideas.
Your insolent use of buzzwords (such us p2p and crypto) are not going to make his idea more powerful, because you are thinking in the infrastructure (like a nigger) while Ted is thinking/working on the fundamentals concepts of hypermedia.

I would recommend you to stop wasting your time making unimportant comments about important people. There are other places for people like you (i.e. HN).

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 14:03

>>41
I am not debating that if it is old, it should not be taken a look at, and that its ideas are awful. I am saying that the standard does not consider the fact that the computer world is distributed in nature, not everyone has the same internet connection or global semantics, and not everyone needs their documents eavesdropped even while reading.

I am just exemplifying that a Fossil repo is the nearest piece of software that fits those ideals, but it is distributed in nature, you can build secure connection connections, and encrypt the information itself too.

And redirecting people to other places where this information needs to be spread is fine. Why hasn't anyone made a HN or r/programming/ thread about it, eh⸮

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 19:18

>>34
How the hell is browsing (something that should be formatted as plain text) in 3D a good idea?

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 19:25

>>37

Every user is uniquely and securely identified.

No way I'm using that in post-NSA times.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 19:32

>>41
p2p and crypto are not buzzwords you piece of shit

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 20:36

>>44

post-nsa

What? You mean NSA times not post-nsa.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 20:37

>>45
Learn to spell cryptography you skiddie.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 20:45

>>45
Learn to spell cryptography you skiddie.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 23:18

>>47 >>48
skid my anus

Name: concise [64c. 👌 4 SMS] 2013-10-17 23:43

>>47-48
Learn2abbr. bro. it's 2013, & aint goig to b,com bloated.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-18 1:17

>>50
retard

Name: ºoº 2013-10-18 5:29

>>51
I am slow at replying back, playing all scenarios in my head for a reply (and doing other shit in the comp). Ad hominem was option # 3. Toodles!

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-18 6:34

toodle my anus

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-19 5:11

>>52
That's not how ad hominem works.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-19 16:17

>>54
My apologies. I had thought calling someone derogatory names without a rebuttal was a attack on the person, to the responding man. My bad. I should have not taking this personally.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-21 16:38

Honestly loving the thread so far guys: Arguments about the ideas of old grumpy sysops who did a lot of drugs and never got laid are way more interesting than they have any right to be -- especially when you throw some cranky ~~aspies~~ autists into the mix! (cf. >>45-55) That said, I feel that >>43 has made an excellent point and I am eagerly awaiting more discussion on this topic!

And I think you guys will appreciate this article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1581891.stm

He was hating the WWW way back when people made Pets.com jokes unironically!

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-21 19:21

>>55
It is, but not in the way of ad hominem. What you are seeing here is name calling. Ad hominems try to discredit the source of the argument.

Name: >>42 2013-10-21 20:56

>>53
Consider it tootled!

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-21 20:58

>>57
discredit my anus

Name: >>43 2013-10-21 21:44

>>56
I didn't think my argument would make so much sense to someone else, but if I can't browse your ``new web'' from a TTY, you guys can go and jump in a lake of putrid Javashit.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-24 0:33

>>60
My next web zone is best viewed with Oculus rift, and you need three synchronized participants to get the full experience of the dropdown menus.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-24 10:35

>>61

not developing your site in XML3D

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-24 11:32

>>62
Please refrain from quoting something that hasn't been said.

Name: Anonymous 2013-10-28 11:54

>>63

lelele

The Real Story of the World Wide Web

1 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-15 0:09

28 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-16 6:01

29 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-16 6:07

30 Name: BOOBIES! 2013-10-16 6:12

31 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-16 15:34

32 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-16 18:03

33 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 0:30

34 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 0:48

35 Name: ‪ 2013-10-17 0:48

36 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 0:50

37 Name: ‪ 2013-10-17 0:58

38 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 1:28

39 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 2:38

40 Name: >>39 2013-10-17 2:40

41 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 2:53

42 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 14:03

43 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 19:18

44 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 19:25

45 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 19:32

46 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 20:36

47 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 20:37

48 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 20:45

49 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-17 23:18

50 Name: concise [64c. 👌 4 SMS] 2013-10-17 23:43

51 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-18 1:17

52 Name: ºoº 2013-10-18 5:29

53 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-18 6:34

54 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-19 5:11

55 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-19 16:17

56 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-21 16:38

57 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-21 19:21

58 Name: >>42 2013-10-21 20:56

59 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-21 20:58

60 Name: >>43 2013-10-21 21:44

61 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-24 0:33

62 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-24 10:35

63 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-24 11:32

64 Name: Anonymous 2013-10-28 11:54