Re: [libreplanet-discuss] New GNU

[Richard-qbiciii]

> Do you mind if I ask some encryption experts to look at this idea?
Please do. That is my intention.

> It sounds good, but it is very general.

There have been a few news items and some posts here over the last few days
that caught my attention.

Excerpts from latest Wired Magazine April 24, 2012  :

His face isn't known to millions. But during his remarkable 20-year career, 
no one has done more than Marc Andreessen to change the way we communicate. 
At 22, he invented Mosaic, the first graphical web browser-an innovation 
that is perhaps more responsible than any other for popularizing the 
Internet and bringing it into hundreds of millions of homes.

Anderson: As I recall, your initial concept for Ning was to let groups 
create their own Craigslists, effectively-trusted marketplaces.

Andreessen: Yeah, at the time we had this concept of "social apps." 
Friendster hadn't worked, MySpace was just getting a little bit of traction, 
and Facebook was still at Harvard. What we knew worked were focused 
applications: Craigslist, eBay, Monster. So our idea was to bring social 
into these domains, in the form of apps that groups could run for 
themselves: their own job boards, their own selling marketplaces, and so on. 
Then later we sort of abstracted that up into the idea of building your own 
social network.

Anderson: In retrospect, it seems like social is another dimension of the 
Internet that was there from the beginning-as if the technology wanted it to 
happen.

Andreessen: I often wonder if we should have built social into the browser 
from the start. The idea that you want to be connected with your friends, 
your social circle, the people you work with-we could have built that into 
Mosaic. But at the time, the culture on the Internet revolved around 
anonymity and pseudonyms

Andreessen: We don't really know. The Internet is still the Wild West. Eight 
years ago, Facebook was just a gleam in a Harvard sophomore's eye. It is 
still possible to build these things from scratch. So I can't tell you what 
the top five platforms are going to be even five years from now. I'm pretty 
sure that Facebook, Apple, and Google will be on that list. But I don't know 
what the other two will be. Maybe Microsoft comes roaring back with Windows 
Phone. Maybe Twitter evolves and gets to scale. HP is planning to open 
source its WebOS-maybe it's that! Or maybe it's something we haven't even 
heard of, a company that's just getting funded right now.
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2012/04/ff_andreessen/
////////////////////////////////////////////

Then we have this from bloomberg ...

Eduardo Saverin, the billionaire co- founder of Facebook Inc. (FB), 
renounced his U.S. citizenship before an initial public offering that values 
the social network at as much as $96 billion, a move that may reduce his tax 
bill.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-11/facebook-co-founder-saverin-gives-up-u-s-citizenship-before-ipo.html
////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Then this.......
And the Privacy Invasion Award Goes To .
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/05/and-privacy-invasion-award-goes-to
//////////////////////////////////////////////////

The gist of all this is that the 'need' of the market will guide the 
manifestation of product to satisfy the demand ( a computer was not needed 
in the 1800's) of the consumers.  That when someone/company fulfills that 
need, where does the loyalty of the technology/company lie? With the people 
that make up the success, or Corporate, selfish interest? Can personal 
information be entrusted to the whims of an individual. How deep does the 
'sell-out' go?  The matter of trust brings us to my final point. Security of 
one's information, and who is in control of it.

The idea that ANYTHING put onto the internet automatically become 'public' 
domain is ludicrous. It should be the opposite. The new platform (domain) 
that is waiting to emerge is one where everything posted to it is private 
and highly encrypted , and only by permission of the owner is anything made 
public. The platform needs to have the security built into it, and only 
talks to recognized 'certified' objects that the platform itself created and 
marked as one of its own. Ideally, the main function of the platform is to 
create 'certified' objects that could be attached to one's unique 'personal 
object', validate objects upon request, create both private and public 
certificates (FSF certified)  and run the 'platform generated' code embedded 
in the object upon it's arrival to a server in the network. After which, the 
object is passed on to a different server. If at all possible, nothing ( 
code,data) is ever stored, but only circulates on the internet. Code and 
data are spontaneously assembled together as needed for a specific task then 
released. Personal data can persist (photos, docs ..) locally or network 
space, but only in highly encrypted objects that can only be accessed by the 
personal object.

Once the objects and their methods are standardized, it would be easy to 
convert existing applications, and new applications to interface with the 
'personal' object, and by permission, any objects and attributes attached to 
it.

Again, the key is assuring that a personal object is unique, and cannot be 
duplicated. If well done, everything would be almost transparent to the 
user. Once a personal object is obtained, then the user has the choice of 
what 'free' software they would like to use to make a phone call, or the 
platform could select a default application. Just click on 'I want to make a 
phone call' and the user types in the phone number. Done. All information 
( even the voice transmission) is encrypted.

What better place to make a start at this new platform then FSF. I still 
have alot to say about freedom, and how it applies to 'free' markets. But 
this is long enough.

Rich


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>
To: "Richard-qbiciii" <richard@qbiciii.com>
Cc: <dave@lab6.com>; <karl@freefriends.org>;
<libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org>
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:28 PM
Subject: Re: [libreplanet-discuss] New GNU


>    What is the role of free software and the developers who believe in a
> higher
>    cause?
>
> I tink free software IS a higher cause.  Having control over your
> computing
> is now an essential human right.
>
> Of course, this is part of the broader cause of human rights in
> general.
>
>    It is my belief that our role is to take back the freedoms that have
>    been stolen from us by trickery and subversion. What can we possible
> offer
>    to the masses? Another social networking program, word processor, or
> some
>    cool nitch application? How about giving back their voices, security,
> and
>    privacy.
>
> It sounds good, but it is very general.
>
>     There is little doubt, to anyone
>    with any reasoning skills left, that we are moving rapidly to a fascist
>    state.
>
> I agree.
>
>    While the new and popular movements , like OWS and such, are
> beneficial, the
>    exposure of the message to the masses is still controlled by entities
> who
>    are in fact enemies of the people.
>
> If you're talking about the problem of the corporate-dominated mass
> media, I agree -- but how to change this is not clear.  Many efforts
> have been made, with only partial success.
>
>    No one but the originator has the
>    private key, and in fact, no other attributes need be added if the
> holder
>    does not wish to. The only thing that is important is that the
> certificate
>    is unique and that it represents a valid living person. THAT IS ALL.
>
> This could be useful.  I don't see how it relates to the issue
> of how to get any messages out to the people, but it could be very useful
> for other things.
>
> Do you mind if I ask some encryption experts to look at this idea?
> --
> Dr Richard Stallman
> President, Free Software Foundation
> 51 Franklin St
> Boston MA 02110
> USA
> www.fsf.org  www.gnu.org
> Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
>  Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call