
Another 10 years of Internet evolution - fanf2
http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2018-06/10years.html
======
codethief
> It may be slightly more disconcerting to realise that your electronic wallet
> is on a device that is using a massive compilation of open source software
> of largely unknown origin, with a security model that is not completely
> understood, but appears to be susceptible to be coerced into being a “yes,
> take all you want”.

If only the entire stack was open-source. I have to say, I distrust the
closed-source part of my phone's stack far more (both the hardware and the
software).

------
thanatropism
I've always been fascinated by the idea of text-mode browsers, but for most of
it the experience was more and more aggravating, and never practical. To the
point where console-based browsers like w3m started to strive to work more
like graphical browsers...

But I opened that page in eww (the browser mode in Emacs) and it just ran
perfectly.

Up until just the other day, modern web pages were serving a decent text-mode
fallout, but they were placing sidebar content _before_ the main content, so
it came up _on top_. This in spite of the fact that they could very easily
have put it afterwards -- CSS is handling everything, no?

For an "evolution of the internet", it's great how gracefully this page
degrades.

~~~
dredmorbius
NYTimes have recently moved their asides and nav _below_ main content, in the
paagestream.

I'm increasingly using text browsers.

HN would benefit by a true nested (list) layout. Or a few <br /> tags within
its table layout.

And visible voting buttons.

TFA here actually reads better as source than as rendered, on mobile (Chrome /
Firefox).

~~~
thanatropism
I have a bash alias "ddg" that opens duckduckgo on w3m for searching error
messages and such. Despite "responsiveness" and all that, the best way to use
a graphical web browser is full-screen; with a tiling wm, text browsers are
often the best choice.

I pity the fool that switches between jupyter notebooks and stack overflow
answers using a mouse and tiny tiny tabs. That fool was me ~18 months ago.

~~~
c22
I use a whole separate computer for browsing/documentation. I switch my
keyboard and mouse with a hotkey through my kvm, but I use multiple monitors
to keep both systems visible at all times. The only downside of this setup is
it forces me to reimplement stack overflow answers rather than copy and paste,
but I suspect this is actually a good thing.

~~~
dredmorbius
Synergy should allow clipboard sharing.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synergy_(software)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synergy_\(software\))

------
default-kramer
The bit about the Internet of Things made me disappointed, as I realized that
the next TV I buy will almost certainly be "smart" even though I don't want it
to. I wonder what other products will go the same way?

~~~
Fnoord
Phones went down that path as well.

If you don't want your smart TV to be "smart" get one with a good screen but
don't mind the smart features (do look at the input options though).

Then after you installed it don't plug it on ethernet, don't give it access to
WLAN, and just use one of its inputs such as HDMI.

Pretty simple, isn't it? I'm using HDHomeRun together with DVB-C [1]. The
public broadcast TV even delivers 1080p. Emby, Kodi, Plex, VLC, Apple TV,
NVidia Shield TV, etc all support it.

[1]
[https://www.silicondust.com/hdhomerun/](https://www.silicondust.com/hdhomerun/)

------
synctext
"Essentially, the public Internet is now a platform of apps on mobile devices"

insightful.

------
Mizza
An appropriate typo:

"Our computers will become more capable in terms of the rage and complexity of
the tasks that they will be able to undertake."

------
codethief
I'd like to add an observation regarding the application layer, as well as a
prediction:

The last ten years have largely seen the internet (and technology in general)
making things more convenient for the majority of the population: Think phones
/ "the internet at your fingertips", cloud apps that synchronize our data
across devices, content platforms like Netflix & Spotify & <insert your
favorite newspaper> which allow us to consume our favorite content anywhere,
anytime, and online stores like Amazon that allow us to get our hands on
practically any product we could wish for—now even within the same day. There
are also fitness trackers which record all the data for us that, previously,
we would have had to measure and jot down manually (which is why we didn't),
and messengers like WhatsApp which allow us to get in touch with anyone at any
time. (Anyone remember how the contacts we had in AIM/YIM/ICQ/MSN messenger
used to be online only when they were at their computer? How annoying it used
to be to exchange files and photos with friends?) We even have personal
assistants now which remind us of upcoming events, notify us about traffic
jams on our way to work and allow us to communicate with our devices through
speech and thus in a more natural way. Finally, don't forget news feeds and
content aggregators like Facebook, Instagram and Google News which make it so
effortless to consume content that, for many users, they have basically become
the only portal to the internet and any content outside these platforms is
basically invisible unless some post on, say, Facebook links to it. Which, in
turn, implies that providers outside these platforms necessarily have to
somehow pick up their users on these platforms and bring them to theirs.
(Remember how it used to be the other way around? But how many people really
still type in URLs in their browser's address bar these days? How annoying and
inconvenient!)

At the same time, almost all platforms that have risen over the past ten years
are those whose value proposition is precisely this: Convenience. One could
even say that the reason today's internet is an internet of monopolies and big
walled gardens is that it's more convenient. Even the internet of things
basically is/will be nothing else than added convenience (at least when it
comes to private consumers).

On the other hand, the reason that privacy and security concerns don't matter
to the vast majority of internet users is that they are not only not
convenient—they are the exact opposite. The same thing goes for the algorithms
that tell us what to consume. Even if they all were open-source, who would
really take the time to understand how they work?

Call me a pessimist but I predict that this trend will prevail. Every
consumer-oriented Next Big Thing® will make our lives even easier. At the same
time, we will continue to lose control over our data and over what we consume
as algorithms dictate our interests.

Remember how the internet of the 2000s used to be this promised land where, to
us techies, anything seemed to be possible? This internet which was going to
be oh-so egalitarian and which promised to bring democracy to the entire
world? These times are over. Brave New World and The Circle, here we come.

~~~
jeffreyrogers
Yes, I think you're right. Most people like the internet the way it is (at
least based on their revealed preferences). That said, I'm not sure there is a
better model we can replace it with. Pretty much anyone can think of ways the
world could be better, but most of those ways aren't feasible in practice. I
think the same is true of most alternative visions of the internet.

~~~
TeMPOraL
I'm not sure if I like the revealed preferences explanation.

Most people weren't asked how would they like their Internet. They don't have
any say in it. _They accept what they 're given_, and don't complain much,
because there's no one who listens.

Most people flock to various Internet sites and services based on lots of
reasons, many of which are unrelated to the actual form of a given service.
People stick with Facebook or WhatsApp not because of their superior UX
choices, but because of network effects. See what happens every time when
Facebook changes something in the UI. People will complain very loudly, but
will not go elsewhere, because of network effects.

Or consider New York Times. They can do absolutely whatever they want with
their site without consequences - their readers go there because it's _the_
New York Times. For lots of people, _news sites are not substitute goods_.

I'd wager that most of the services on the Internet aren't substitute goods
for majority of people, for one reason or another.

------
myWindoonn
I share the author's dismal outlook on security. Folks simply cannot be
bothered to care about it propter-hoc, and post-hoc is often too late. We
might be fucked at this point.

------
jsutton
> However, I find it extremely challenging to be optimistic about security and
> trust in the Internet.

This is what blockchain is good for. Security and trust. As the ecosystem
matures, there will be boundless opportunities for innovation and evolution. I
know there's an enormous amount of skepticism on here w.r.t blockchain, but
the potential of it is incredibly exciting.

