Hacker News Reader

Comment by nathan_long | Hacker News Reader

>> the web is the least free of all platforms from the users point of view

You're confusing "the web" with "networked software".

When you use the web, you have no control of the server but full control of your client (if your browser is open source). When you use a networked app, you have no control of the server AND no control of the client.

"Do I want control of the software I run on my machine?" is a separate question from "do I want that software communicating with other computers that I don't control?"

View on HN

There is no confusion here: I want control of my data.

Currently the number of web apps (by which I mean something with a html/css/js interface that runs in a web browser) that I can run locally with my own data that I store locally (or not, my choice) is tiny. The number of native apps that give me full control of my data is huge, because native platforms make that easy to do. Local file access APIs are relatively new in the browser.

You are correct that there are plenty of tasks that are inherently about communicating with another computer, but that is not what we are talking about here. Writing a document needn't involve communicating with another computer. Editing an image needn't involve communicating with another computer. Maintaining my todo list, calculating how much time to bill a client; these needn't involve communication with another computer that I don't control.

"I want control of my data."

One might even argue the idea of individual control is somewhat at odds with the logical structure of FOSS, particularly in it's GNUist form - i.e. for a Lisper (and Stallman was/is one), there's no semantic distinction between code and data. Your position requires distinguishing bits from bits.

Solutions which distinguish bits from bits are political, not computational.

This entire question is political, not computational.

> there's no semantic distinction between code and data

I struggle to understand how this can be true, and I say that as a Lisper (spiritually if not currently), because 'this data does something meaningful when interpreted by a computer' is exactly a semantic distinction from 'this other data doesn't'

What is the semantic difference between data which does nothing meaningful and lisp code that does nothing meaningful?

Or to be Wittgensteinian about it, point to the part of a datum which is the meaning.

I quite like my code separated from my data.

Being able to open up a word processing document without it being able to execute arbitrary code on my computer is one of the many benefits.

Oh, wait, Microsoft Word macros...

Bits submitted by me to the server or derived from or mixed with bits submitted by me are my data. Bits that are created by the web developer that would be there if I didn't even exist are his app. The division isn't political; it is one of origin.

I thought the original article was about locked platforms. I don't have access to any of my data on my iPhone except photos and video. Everything else is sealed up in that system with no way to get at it.

How is that better?

If I had root I could get at that data.

That's not taking away from your point that Web apps may have similar problems but there's at least 3 distinct platforms

* Open Computers with native apps (Windows, Mac, Linux)

* Closed computers with native apps (iOS, Android, XBox, PS3, ...)

* The Web

The article is ranting about closed computers with native apps.

I think we're actually in agreement. Let me restate my argument, and, I think, Berners-Lee's:

"I don't always send data over the network, but when I do, I use an open-source browser that uses open protocols."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com