|
Sunday, March 9, 2003
Previous topic
|
Next topic
|
|
 Sunday, March 9, 2003
started 3/9/2003; 8:16:01 AM - last post 3/10/2003; 2:26:15 PM
|
|
Doc Searls - Sunday, March 9, 2003 
3/9/2003; 12:16:01 PM (reads: 7319, responses: 3)
|
|
On the road again 
| | The next several days will take me to Los Angeles, Toronto and back. Blogging will probably be light. |
World of ID Ends?
| | Welcome to the New World. Andre, founder & memehacker-in-chief of both PingID and SourceID, partner of Liberty Alliance in his PingID capacity (I think I have that right) is calling for folks to hijack the Liberty Alliance protocol. It's free for the taking, so why not? |
Happy beginnings
| | On the whole, we're continuing to get positive and constructive feedback on World of Ends. A big thanks to everybody for that. |
| | If I'm not mistaken, in the past two days I've linked to postings in Denmark, Netherlands, Germany, France, Italy, U.K., Brazil, New Zealand, Japan and Australia. I'm sure I'm missing many more. |
| | Exactly what will you do differently, today, after reading this essay, then you did yesterday before reading this essay? |
| | And we got Slashdotted again. |
| | Apparently I've reached the limit of my software's ability to stay alive and keep a bulleted list. So that's enough for today. I'll just add one more here: Seppuku, who regrets, as do I, that Brett Glass (a critic of WoE) does not have a blog. |
| | Whatever, it makes an interesting controlled study. |
discuss
|
|
sabat - Re: Sunday, March 9, 2003
3/9/2003; 5:17:19 PM (reads: 490, responses: 0)
|
|
|
If Russell Beattie's blog post is the "best criticism so far," it ain't sayin' much. Instead of thoughtful criticism, it's just a bunch of nitpicky missing-the-point points. I posted this in response on his blog:
Boy, I'll bet anything you're a programmer. I can see the coder-think going on here, mistaking large points for tiny nits.
1: The internet as a *concept* is not complicated. Doc doesn't mean the details of how it works; he means that at a high level, the arrangement of how it works is very simple. (Contrast that to video-on-demand schemes.)
2: Ok, the internet is a thing. You're picking on semantics here, and missing the point. It's not a thing = it's not a thing a marketing guy can control or manipulate. It's not a product.
3: The internet is very stupid. Again, you're trying to make this a much finer point than intended. It does not care packets going from A to B are video, audio, email, whatever. Its awareness ends at protocols. Again, you have to imagine that Doc is talking about what might have been had corporations designed the internet.
4: No, the net doesn't need to be generic to be useful -- unless by "generic" you mean "fair to all traffic". It gives no one type of traffic priority by nature. That's what he means. Also, "it's" = "it is", while "its" is possessive.
6: He doesn't mean "suburbs" literally. Cripes. He means internet endpoints.
7: Ok, some ends are bigger than others. So?
8: What the essay is trying to say is that a) no ONE entity owns it, b) how fast is not relevant since using it at all is what counts, and c) anyone can add new uses for it without asking permission. No one's thinking "like it's 1999." The point isn't whether IM is united under inter-operability; it's that I could build the ultimate chat client/server combo and have thousands of people using it *without asking permission from anyone*.
discuss
|
|
Andrew Careaga - Re: World of Ends
3/10/2003; 6:14:43 PM (reads: 504, responses: 0)
|
|
|
|
leonid - Re: On the road again
3/10/2003; 6:26:15 PM (reads: 544, responses: 0)
|
|
|
Would it be possible to see you in Toronto? I just wanted to show you the prototype of new Cluetrain-based Search Engine :)
discuss
|
|
|
Copyright 2009 The Doc Searls Weblog
|
