Why the guardian gave a rather prominent opinion piece for tim berners-lee recently?
That’s a silly question – what are you driving at?
Perhaps the logic that if someone is perceived as an inventor of something-x, their opinion is taken as somehow more valid? (re something-x)
I think there’s a more interesting issue at hand. Maybe linked to your question, but might link to other stuff as well – why is the “web inventor” is practically calling for censorship?
Well, the sorting out of “fake news”, can be seen as a form of censorship?
How else can we deal with fake news?
How about search narcissus kind of algorithms?
How about narcissus and some critical thinking education?
Isn’t it the education for all was supposed to be making people smarter and independently minded?
Even when the educational system is geared towards preparing people for work and job oriented environments?
Is that what might be called “digression”?
Isn’t the point that while the ideas here aren’t the correct solutions, maybe they show other – non censorship oriented ways – might be available?
But censorship is profitable, why not look into that?
Yes. It allows people to offer both protection and sell that ability to defend – no?
Like facebook protects its users from opinions they don’t like, and sells that ability to advertisers?
Aren’t these questions to do with other elements of tim berners-lee opinions?
Who’s web is it any way?
lol The guardian thinks its tim’s.. hey?
Tim thinks it’s everyone’s hence we lost it?
This guy, here, thinks the web was stolen. Maybe a point?
Isn’t it a bit strange to get an opinion like that from someone who pimps “indie” – a tool that will endeavour to protect people?
People or users?
Protect or offer ways for people and bots etc – to evolve their own ways of dealing with stuff?
But does the writer not have a good point saying that the web was stolen by google, facebook, etc?
Have we ever had the web?
Have we not?
When did we have the web?
To begin with?
When it was tim’s? 😉
No.. Later.. When – as an open source – it was openly circulated?
When universities – rather than big corporations – did the development? (eg mosaic browser?)
Were they not happy to sell code and cash in?
So the web was stolen when they sold open code and cashed in?
If they were able to sell – was it Ours to begin with? 😉
What about the development, like w3 consortium?
Could anyone get in there?
Anyone interested even if they weren’t techies?
So.. If it wasn’t stolen – when was it ours?
Maybe tim fancied the web to be ours?
The web is ours in tim’s wondering mind?