The inventor of the World Wide Web has unveiled a plan for a new secure internet

mongeese

Posts: 643   +123
Staff
Why it matters: The internet is not what its founder, Tim Berners-Lee, wanted it to be. It has finally exploded into his dream of an open resource that everyone can see and interact with, purchase things, connect and innovate on. But that’s come with something no one saw coming back when the internet was in its infancy: unwanted control and manipulation of our data.

For several years Sir Tim Berners-Lee and his team at MIT have been developing a decentralized platform designed to give every internet user full control over their data: Solid (Social Linked Data). This week he is revealing the first start-up to take advantage of the Solid platform, called Inrupt. Berners-Lee and his partner John Bruce will lead a small team of inspired developers to take the power back from the internet giants.

“The intent is world domination. We are not talking to Facebook and Google about whether or not to introduce a complete change where all their business models are completely upended overnight. We are not asking their permission.”

Berners-Lee says that Facebook’s continuous failure to protect its users is something that drives him: “We have to do it now. It’s a historical moment.”

I think we can all agree a change is sorely needed; only two days ago it was revealed that 50 million Facebook accounts may have been compromised. Berners-Lee says that Facebook’s continuous failure to protect its users is something that drives him: “We have to do it now. It’s a historical moment.”

Solid works through something called a Solid POD, a Personal Online Data storage system. A POD is simply a file that contains all your data: videos, images, calendar, address, preferences, friend lists – everything from where you work to the name of your Labrador. The Solid development team is working on software that creates and manages a POD, and once it is fully complete (soon, we’re told) companies and individuals will be able to create and use their own POD servers. What this means is that you can store your own POD on an internet-connected device or simply pay a company to store it for you.

Any and all sites or apps that want access to information about you simply ask your POD for it – depending on your choices, it will say yes or no. For example, a social media platform may ask your POD for your name, age, phone number and any images you might want to share. But the social media platform doesn’t control the information: by disabling the platform’s access to your POD the information is removed.

This is where Inrupt enters the fray: it allows you to create a POD on Inrupt’s servers, and it will create apps and assist other companies to create apps using Solid. Technically, you can create a POD right now on their website and play around with calendar and note-taking apps, but, to be frank, the interface is dreadful and nowhere near ready for use. Inrupt is currently funded by Glasswing Ventures, who specialize in AI and other technology start-ups, but Inrupt is pursuing further funding.

The Solid platform is a good idea with good goals. Solid PODs are a good and technologically feasible execution of that idea. But will it get its feet off the ground?

We can look at this in two ways. The first is the perspective of an up-and-coming platform. It’s brilliant; the next big thing. Like pretty much all platforms, ad-revenue is an important aspect. The platform’s creators are faced with a choice: use PODs to protect users’ data and make less money, or trust that they can protect users’ data themselves and make more money. The creators will likely have good intentions (think WhatsApp or Telegram) but it is hard to find investors who'll agree to make less money.

The second perspective is of an established platform. Take YouTube as an example. It would be extremely difficult for them to switch over to PODs even if they wanted to: shareholders would not be impressed by suddenly switching over to a less profitable business model (e.g. non-targeted ads). Particularly when they can easily just continue with their current business model.

The bottom line is, the Solid platform is a brilliant idea but because it doesn’t make economic sense, it’s hard to envisage widespread adoption. Unless Inrupt can somehow make PODs profitable for companies to adopt, or create their own platforms to rival Google and Facebook, our data will remain in the hands of the corporate giants.

Permalink to story.

 
AMEN!

If crowd-funding can compensate every crazie with a keyboard, let;s start crowd funding to put this worthwhile new paradigm over the top. A small fee for downloading the app once launched and we should be good to go.
Lol... this is attempting to take on Google and Facebook.... crowdfunding MIGHT raise a few million - and that’s being optimistic... you’d need BILLIONS to have a chance...
 
Lol... this is attempting to take on Google and Facebook.... crowdfunding MIGHT raise a few million - and that’s being optimistic... you’d need BILLIONS to have a chance...

This is such a fundamental right (security of data) that you might be quite surprised at the support out there. You might EVEN get Facebook and its ilk to cave in to decency, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting.
At least we'd know where the IT Bigs stand on privacy issues if they fight this. Pretty simple, actually.

Can I put you down for $100?
 
Except that Tim Berners-Lee is CIA. Misdirection. Too conveniently timed. They are building controlled opposition. New lipstick. Same pig. There can be no 'real freedom' until the Patriot Act is rescinded, and the CIA & NSA do not require backdoors to encryption keys...using the Federal Bridge PKI system to track everything, and examine the block-chain meta-data at will. We all know that they have 'tricked' the FISA warrant system, so there is no real pretense of accountability. This is why the FBI won't release the FISA court documents to congress or the president...both of which are unconstitutional positions to take. Justice is claiming in fact that they are a 'defacto' fourth branch of government...making them the 'elite' soviet style controllers. They also control the Internet, social media, satellites, military, etc--communications. They know everything about anyone they choose to inspect.
 
Except that Tim Berners-Lee is CIA. Misdirection. Too conveniently timed. They are building controlled opposition. New lipstick. Same pig. There can be no 'real freedom' until the Patriot Act is rescinded, and the CIA & NSA do not require backdoors to encryption keys...using the Federal Bridge PKI system to track everything, and examine the block-chain meta-data at will. We all know that they have 'tricked' the FISA warrant system, so there is no real pretense of accountability. This is why the FBI won't release the FISA court documents to congress or the president...both of which are unconstitutional positions to take. Justice is claiming in fact that they are a 'defacto' fourth branch of government...making them the 'elite' soviet style controllers. They also control the Internet, social media, satellites, military, etc--communications. They know everything about anyone they choose to inspect.
This is the reason why Kavanaugh shouldn't be confirmed. The fight over him about sexual assault isn't real. Just a partisan show. Kavanaugh helped write the Patriot Act. It hasn't come up as far as I know in the hearings. Meaning, neither side cares about our privacy or the 4th Amendment.
 
This is the reason why Kavanaugh shouldn't be confirmed. The fight over him about sexual assault isn't real. Just a partisan show. Kavanaugh helped write the Patriot Act. It hasn't come up as far as I know in the hearings. Meaning, neither side cares about our privacy or the 4th Amendment.

IMO The patriot act should have never been needed and should be terminated.
 
Last edited:
We need internet 2.0. I've had enough of massive corporations pushing politics and ideologies where it don't belong. Also the control the governments have, from the uk banning porn at the end of the year to the eu's link tax and end of fair use.
 
I think the pod idea is interesting in theory, but what will happen is it will be mandatory to store your pod on company servers anyways. And then those companies will sell data from your pod for the highest bidder.
 
So uh

Once they request data from this "POD"

How do you keep them from keeping that data locally on their servers?
 
How do you keep them from keeping that data locally on their servers?
That is my question. I fail to see how this will change anything. They will still be able to collect information from people willing to give it away in essays/whatever. And they will still be able to store it for themselves, essentially bypassing your pod.
 
This will be good until some disgruntled employee steals everyone's POD. hahahahahahhah

The POD will be on YOUR computer under YOUR control. They'll have to go some to get MY stuff out of MY pants pocket!

No it wont. The article states 'it allows you to create a POD on Inrupt’s servers'.
This is perfect example of people not knowing where their data is actually stored.
 
1. The major part of any really big platform (Facebook, YouTube) is ability to deliver content with maximum efficiency. Caching servers, distributed systems - there is tons of work of developers/administrators.
2. What prevent any party with permission to access your information make a copy of all available data?
 
It's a power struggle early on. On one hand millions of POD users could basically say "I won't sign up for your service unless you do so through my POD" at the same time, giants like Youtube or facebook will say... "we don't accept POD accounts (or they are very crippled); if you want access to what we have, then you do it on our terms."

But this is good, because then it creates new competitors at the margins. Vimeo may say "we accept your POD accounts, and are willing to monetize differently." along with thousands of other sites doing the same. Eventually POD may become the standard as people realize they value control of their data more than they do YouTube, and that there are alternatives. Ideally everyone realizes POD is just how you are going to have to get customers... and even the giants capitulate to it. Or perhaps there just becomes a two-tiered internet... sites that you will only use with POD, and sites you are willing to risk not using POD on. Or people who use POD and people who don't. Just like there are people who will use PGP encryption and those who do not.... but at least POD will be a real alternative.

TO pay for POD I see it being bundled in with other cloud services or internet services. I'd gladly pay $10-$50 a year for POD or more, depending how it rolls out. I already pay for Netflix, and amazon prime, and Usenet, and Office 365, and my fiber connection, ...etc. on a yearly or monthly basis. If all it takes is $50 a year to secure all my data and be able to cut people off from it physically and legally when I want to. That's an easy price to pay. And I'd bet there are tens of millions of us. ... in essence POD is a global "pay to remove ads and tracking" fee... that applies to every POD site instead of having to subscribe to hat feature on lots of different sites.
 
Last edited:
Back