Slashdot Mirror
Could an Erasable Internet Kill Google?
zacharye writes "As Google's share price soars beyond $1,100, it seems like nothing can stop the Internet juggernaut as its land grab strategies continue to win over the eyes of its users and the wallets of its advertising clients. But an analysis published over this past weekend raises an interesting question surrounding a new business model that could someday lead to Google's downfall. Do we want an erasable Internet?"
Because the odds of me getting super powers and destroying Google are the same as companies choosing not to store data. They will either openly admit to it like Facebook and Google, or they'll just lie and do it anyway.
See subject.
Expanding though. Erasable internet is a very very small segment of internet data traffic. The whole point of something being erasable is that is only to be seen by one particular recipient. Given we are here on Slashdot, while logged into facebook, reading our email demonstrates pretty easily that ephemeral internet activities only make a tiny percentage of the total data.
We are still going to shop, browse, email, and post. Erasable internet is irrelevant to this.
This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen on Slashdot.
With absolutely nothing pushing the pendulum in the direction of increased privacy, I'm for an erasable Internet, just because nothing else is there to push in that direction. Governments love the info. Companies love it. People don't have the power or voice to state anything. So, it is obvious when someone comes along that sort of guarantees [1] a picture will disappear, people will flock to that service en masse since they are so tired of a large, WORM database. Post a pic on FB, it is there forever. Post it on a website, reputable search engines will slurp it up. Use robots.txt and a hidden URL, it gets slurped up anyway unless there is some type of active authentication.
A company that makes a peer to peer protocol to send encrypted messages where the key comes from multiple clients (and each client will not send the piece after the expiration date) is going to make money. People do want privacy, but it so incredibly hard to get that. If I wanted to send a photo to someone, and physically travelling is out of the picture, I'd have to get with them, set up gpg, then send it via that. Or, copy it onto offline media and snail mail it. Some firm that uses decent cryptography will make a mint just assuring people that a conversation has a high chance of staying stays private and vanishing after it was done.
[1]: How long the pic really remains on the company's server is a question, but to people, it is off the record.
Honestly, I think the impact on society of governments and organizations to rewrite history or remove history from the internet is a much more frightening concept than people being able to google your name and find out you were a twerp in your younger years.
The horse has to actually want that themselves. For an erasable internet to work, everyone in the chain would have to cooperate on that.
Where profit motives exist for tracking them, horses get watched going around the racetrack. The slaughterhouse wins in the end.
I don't think you can ask that question at all without first discussing if an "erasable internet" is even possible.
You know how data likes to be free? Well, it turns out it really enjoys being stored also.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The article doesn't mention any downfall of Google. The whole idea is a false dichotomy. Why can't both types of content exists. Oh, wait, they already do.
Just because something is erasable doesn't mean it has to be erased. Most useful content wants to be found. Erasing that content would be stupid.
Google's job is to help people find that content. There is a lot of competition to be found by google. I don't see the ABILITY to erase content an issue for Google.
Just because there are types of content like snapchat that are not meant to be searchable doesn't mean the downfall of Google.
http://snapchatleaked.com/
Nice idea but flawed...
Until we outlaw the NSA-Military-Corporate-Industrial Government's ability to do their "Big Data Spying" in the name of "security" no application / service will elude the rooms where they scrape your data & mail before it hits your application.
No mention of that in the article... but then you would not expect real reporting from a paper owned by Rupert Murdoch
"Memory" is critical to the operations of NSA in their war against United States Citizens.
Limiting or even removing the "memory" of the internet is a novel "left flank" to counter the NSA, so beloved by Obama and the National Democratic Committee, for obvious reasons (interim election 2014 and Presidential Election 2016, and the Obama Presidential Library Fund Committee).
Snicker snicker.
Most revenue models currently used are based upon the fact that Google knows who you are.
Once it becomes possible to use Google and other services anonymously Google will have a big problem.
Not true at all! Very often I'm looking for the answer to something and it was discussed in a forum back in 2007 or 2000 even... and now that human knowledge is forever passable to whoever needs it, when they need it. Humanities greatest achievement is inventing something that remembers for us. We're terrible at it.
Sure.
Can we have it?
No.
Wisdom goes that there are no stupid questions. This, however, is as close as you can get.
internet is already erasable..
but what _could_ kill google would be some law that stated that you couldn't make use of caches of sites... since , uhm, that's what it would take to change the current erasable internet into even more erasable, by somehow forcing people to not keep copies.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
If you dry up the source of information that has allowed Google to dominate Internet search then it would hurt them financially. The biggest fear for them would be tougher privacy laws. Right now the Class Action E-Mail/Wiretapping case doesn't look too good for them so there may be some changes in the future for gmail users. The NSA fiasco with Snowden means that more people are asking pointed questions and Google and all the others who make money off of your personal data have to do a little walk on the tightrope. On one side they've pushed legislators away from enacting tougher privacy laws but now they're information has been hacked by the NSA yet they condemn that. The only reason Google exists is that it can mine information efficiently. Throw a few lawsuits and some new legislation into that mix and it suddenly gets very cloudy for them. Take a look at Google Glass for example, right now the thought of millions of people with always on cameras can become quite disturbing especially since you don't know where those images are going or what they may be used for. Sure there's the augmented reality take on it, but how will society take to it in the long run?
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Google already provides this service, to the appropriate clients.
Just serach for Soros and ###ACK ###80x805 Disconnect
No brain, no pain.
If it's publicly viewable, it's archivable, which means someone will archive it, particularly if no one else is, so it's not erasable.
Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word 'no'.
Bullshit assumptions about "old information" being anything 3 years or older.
Yeah only 5% of people ever need to get info on stuff more than 3 years old. Most have upgraded from Windows 7 to Windows 8 already and have left Windows Server 2008 R2. And the rest of us are using the latest Linux kernels or *BSD installs.
Seriously if Google does their job right old stuff won't appear in your results if you are searching for new stuff unless the new stuff is using the same names (in which case the person who came up with the new stuff is being stupid).
The real noise is the link spam crap. When I search for stuff I get pages with my search terms but nothing else but ads or nothing related. Or worse I get unrelated pages without my search terms at all.
Google getting unusable is because of crap like this, not because of old stuff.
Apparently you've never had to work with anything but the most recent releases of software.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Apparently you are so young you were never forced to do research for a high school or College paper without the internet. You know those books and Encyclopedias 'older than 3 years are noise and rot that nobody has any use for' yet they were available and useful for a century before the internet appeared.
"News for nerds", edited by people who clearly don't understand how the internet works. If someone can read your data, they can save it and share it. An erasable internet is impossible.
What we need is Google health care. This tonsillectomy sponsored by advil.
Zoid.com
> I bet more than 95% of everything older than 3 years is noise and rot that nobody has any use for.
...
Sounds plausible. Still -- one man's junk is another man's treasure
Archive.org is invaluable for this reason alone.
Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
You're an idiot. I think you should be aware of this.
http://xkcd.com/979/ :)
Google is close to unusable unless you manually set it to show recent results. Old stuff on the internet is mostly noise and rot.
I bet more than 95% of everything older than 3 years is noise and rot that nobody has any use for.
obvious troll is obvious
"have left Windows Server 2008 R2"
Are you having a larf? Most of our systems have only just left Server 2003. At least 2008 has a functioning GUI wheras with S2012 MS wants you to manage everything remotely. A lot of our Server apps will never ever support MS Remote App managment and use a local gui to setup their config and operations. For some apps we deliberately disable remote access because of security concerns. Yeah I know that this sounds silly but these systems are used by people who are not users but abusers.
It will be 2015/16 before we go to 2012Rx if ever because of the latest MS price hike hase made us seriously consider going to RHEL. We don't use any Sharepoint, lookout or BizTalk crap on these systems.
The House Ways and Means Committee is considering making advertising non-deductable as a business expense. That would take a bite out of Google.
There are good arguments for a tax on advertising. Most Americans are "spent out"; they're spending almost everything they earn. The US personal savings rate is near an all-time low of 2%. In that situation, advertising can't create new demand. It's just a war between advertisers. So that's a good place to tax.
Get rid of Google's 20 year Usenet archive and half of their data mine is gone.
I miss the WebCrawler. Oh those were the days, when games used IPX and porn was in text form. Now get off my fucking lawn!!
There will never be an erasable internet.
You're missing one of the points. Real time dynamically changing content. What I see on website X at 1:38:25 pm, is 100% differet from what you see at 1:39:25 pm. Imagine constantly, or semi, changing Net contant on a massive scale. It wouldn't be saveable, except at the user end, and even then, you'd have to reserve it for something archival to slurp.
I don't know to what end it would serve, but it becomes and exponential storage increase to try an archive everything at every moment.
Time Machine, set to 10 seconds for the Internet? Not happening. Yet...
You are confusing "mostly unusable" with "mostly unusable by you. The rest of us use it every day with great success.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
... a message on the thread in recent months.
It's the free/stored dual nature of data; which can be easily proven by passing data through a very narrow slit.
Let's hope it is not possible because the probability of living out some old novels like Fahrenheit 451 and 1984 might well be increased exponentially. After all if it is erasable and there is no public hard copy then: "We are at war with Eurasia, we have always been at war with Eurasia" becomes available at the touch of a switch, as well as the evidence to eliminate dissenters.
I bet more than 95% of everything older than 3 years is noise and rot that nobody has any use for.
If that's true, my guess would be that's because 95% of people who use the internet only consume. This 'new business model' only applies to social media. Knowledge certainly shouldn't be ephemeral.
Please consider that the human species greatest advantages over other species stem from our sharing of knowledge. Sharing also has the immediate effect of accumulation. The sum of individuals becomes an organism accumulating knowledge over time.
Have we really come to a point, where sharing information is already restricted for several generations at a time that we're seriously considering the benefits of forgetting everything from more than 3 years ago. While none of these things will truly stop the motivated learner, I find these artificial roadblocks to the strengths of our species is troublesome.
Apparently you are so young you were never forced to do research for a high school or College paper without the internet. You know those books and Encyclopedias 'older than 3 years are noise and rot that nobody has any use for' yet they were available and useful for a century before the internet appeared.
Senility must be creeping up on you, old man. Those books and encyclopedias were written with future usefulness in mind; random internet postings and slapped together web pages were not.
Yes.
Google wouldn't be hurt a bit by "erasing" the internet, they run mostly on advertising that just requires your current attention.
Data is a very naughty boy that way.
Real time dynamically changing content. What I see on website X at 1:38:25 pm, is 100% differet from what you see at 1:39:25 pm
That is not realistically going to happen of course. In reality most things change on a more life-like pace that is easily archivable for anyone that cares, or even those that just collect for the sake of collection.
But even in your presented case, you don't have to archive every iteration. Just snapshots, or trends, or some kind of summary about what was and how it shifted. There is always the possibility of storing some permeable shadow of a thing, no matter how often you try to change it.
One last thought; the saying "the more things change, the more they stay the same" exists for a very valid reason...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
...he'll be heartbroken!
will there be a functioning erasable internet. At the moment, 99% - probably more - of the population do not care what data is collected about them or even that data is collected about them. Those who do care, opt out in whatever way they can. Google = internet or IE = internet are dominant thought patterns and will continue to be. Edward who? .......
And what use would be a site like that, except for some kind of art statement and short lived entertainment? People will post "Hey, check out this always changing site! What does it show to you?" for a day or two, and then it will successfully go into a dark corner, visited only by few outliers who like the randomness.
If you want it to be any useful, you'll need to provide a way for people to link to a specific item on your site. That's where crawlers step in - your frontpage can be always changing, they just need to collect the individual posts.
For College most information still is in books and papers. Forget the internet for anything that is not phyics or other hard science. If you do research in history or social sciences you need 300 page books written by professors. I still have not yet found that information on the net.
If I may be so bold as to state this, calling social sciences books information is a bit of a joke in my opinion. I generally consider such books a good way to start a barbecue in fact. And actually, a lot of engineering related information on the internet is incorrect due to Arduino users making uninformed statements about mass production consumer electronics.
Leave Google alone finally.
This is boring and you are all pathetic.
Look up the word irony. Maybe use Google for that...
Look up the word irony. Maybe consider using Google for that...
That would be right if Google was how it was at the start. However Google is not how it once was as it is no more just a search engine. However, sure the laws in a country can change. That does not stop Google from moving its will-be-"illegal" server in a country where there will be no problem.
Well I sure wouldn't mind it if Google would stop bugging me about using my real name... And no I do not want to be part of Google+ for the 10,000th time. I've already stopped using YouTube after it twice cleverly forced all of my comments to use my real name.
Stop being evil, Google.
Could a chair fucking kill Google?
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
The answer: Yes, an erasable internet would kill the whole internet, of which Goolge is a part.
As it stands, the human race is the accumulation of human experiences (from our inherent interest in exploration, all the way down to what we put in our food and why). This information is integrated into the fabric of our consciousness, and when looked at from a global perspective, shows that evolution is actually going on. It's a bio-logic sense-making intelligence that needs nothing other than the human cortex (for "storage"). This kind of "memory" cannot happen in anything other than the fabric of the natural universe, AKA bio-logical beings.
But the tools of humanity, as they are, require their own "shelf" to reside. For the internet, the 'storage of data' is the very fabric of it's existence, it's "shelf" on which it resides. Like someone pointed out, looking at a forum from 13 years ago for information is the very reason for the internet. It was what everyone was excited about back in the late 80's-early 90's when we talked about what the internet is. However now since things like Facebook and twitter (or as the article talks about, Snapchat) have exposed the ridiculousness of humanity's ego, then that same ego wishes to remove the past, in order to preserve itself. This would be like removing roads because cars emit carbon that's causing global warming. Use the internet as it was originally designed or, like using any other tool incorrectly, you may break the tool, or whatever you're using the tool incorrectly on.
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
It really depends on what you are looking for. Most of my searches are for computing related issues and given the rate at which these things change old results are unlikely to be useful. On the other hand if you are looking for tips on unblocking your drain, not much changes in the plumbing world so a 10 or 20 year old posting (if you found one) is as likely to be relevant as one posted yesterday.
Whooooosh*
*That's a 'whooooosh' from 2004. If you want a newer 'whooooosh' you'll have to miss a less obvious use of sarcasm.
This may make me sound old but before Google was around the Internet was much much smaller and search engines pretty much SUCKED. Searching was (and sometimes still is) a skill/art. Sure search engines and directories got incrementally better at first and then Google blew them all out of the water.
Feel free to use another search site. Nobody is forcing you to use Google.
Keep the Classic Slashdot.
Both questions are useful. The question of whether an erasable internet is desirable is a separate one. Only a complete fucking idiot, asshole, or evil fuck would think so, however. Victors already write the history books, you want them to erase history as well?
There are two positive effects which come from the internet never forgetting. One, we will learn (eventually) that things are never forgotten, and learn to act accordingly. Two, we will learn (also eventually) that we are more the same than different, and hopefully learn to act accordingly.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You forget the need to search for prior art to prevent lawsuits...
Without a history you are doomed to have your business sued out of existence.
Yes, because equipment you bought a year ago is garbage and needs to be thrown away and destroyed so that others do not have to suffer with it.
MOST results I am looking for are 3-5 years old, Just Tuesday I was searching and found information to make a very old USB framegrabber work under linux. I know heresy making old things work again, how dare I steal money from the corporate overlords like that....
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The day browsers start bundling Ad Block by default.
Wow, great one on catching all those people with serious replies.
And if you were serious, still congrats because you still managed to get people to reply regardless.
That statement is like the most retarded thing I have read all year.
Restated it would make more sense, over 70% of people have no use for 95% of anything older than 3 years.
That'd be closer to true since most people on the net are casuals and it is the 30% that really do much of the heavy lifting.
The numbers aren't exact, but they are close enough. We geeks are the minority these days.
I just wish for a P2P internet where things truly could be hosted in the cloud similar to that one distributed encrypted network I forgot the name of, I think it was I2P, not sure.
Except in that system old content died off if it wasn't active for a period of time, which isn't a good idea if we wanted to make a huge internet archive system.
OB xkcd!
Historically the book burning assholes have always been assholes. It is valuable to document your imbecilic rant in that way. It allows future generation can see what unwashed savages roamed the earth. They will think ohh this man (you) didn't know anything! It will be very special to them I assure you.
gdewilde@gmail.com
There is no such thing as DRM, and apps to save "unsaveable" Snapchat images are legion.
This is a fool's quest, and whoever wrote this WSJ piece is woefully ignorant of their subject.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
Wrong.
Without the "old internet " hanging around, we'd all have forgotten Chris Burke's wonderful Bobcat Ranching advert.
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1280423&cid=28457651
Google just puts you inside a bubble. That effectively erases the rest of the internet.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Not true at all! Very often I'm looking for the answer to something and it was discussed in a forum back in 2007 or 2000 even... and now that human knowledge is forever passable to whoever needs it, when they need it. Humanities greatest achievement is inventing something that remembers for us. We're terrible at it.
But more commonly you end up wasting an hour trying to follow some outdated or obsolete advice.
Of course not, but the wast majority of information on the internet older then 3 years is essentially old and worthless.
Work on your reading comprehension. It will help a lot when you seek and process information.
I thought most data was streamed encrypted video by now. But anyway, IRC is erasable, and I don't see IRC killing Google.
Apparently you are so young you were never forced to do research for a high school or College paper without the internet. You know those books and Encyclopedias 'older than 3 years are noise and rot that nobody has any use for' yet they were available and useful for a century before the internet appeared.
This does not address anything I wrote. Work on your reading comprehension!
And to think that if you go out and take a fair look at things, Arduino users have a leg up on the facts compared to the slop that has accompanied the Raspberry Pi crowd.
Actually, back in the days that Google started, I never opted-in for any automated service to crawl and cache my site's data.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
It only takes a few shouts of 'work on your reading comprehension' before it's apparent that it's you who have horrible communications skills.
Go back to your ruby on rails BS or whatever pathetic tripe is trending today.
The Recording and movie industries have spent decades trying to make an erasable Internet. In their fruitless endeavor they have been joined by countless embarrassed companies, politicians and countries. There is no such thing as an erasable Internet, and there never will be. The Internet isn't a single entity, it is an ecosystem made up of billions of parts with vastly different political, religious and personal views. None of which takes into account the crazy people, the Internet is full of crazy people, and you can't reason with them.
The article might as well be titled, Could we get rid of the tides if we didn't have a moon?
if you +1 the post, and it gets erased before anyone reads it, did you actually +1 the post?
Yes, you did. You publicly posted your stuff on the internet. You opted in to EVERYONE crawling and caching your site's data. (Yes, every browser caches your site in local memory in order to render it). Google takes the high road and obeys robots.txt in case you change your mind and don't want automated crawlers to read your site. Not everyone gives you that option.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I have to agree with this poorly moderated parent.
The problem we have on the internet isn't privacy, but data longevity. It isn't that you tweeted or had an unfortunate picture posted on face book. But the fact that it just goes around and lasts forever which causes the damage.
Searching on Google for the most part you are looking for updated information about something... While there is some historical stuff for the most part you are trying to find the newest information.
Do you really need to search for setting up WinSock on windows 3.1
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
The ~20% price hike did put a damper on things, but at least it is up front.
I'd definitely move any servers to RHEL [1] if given the option, but be aware it will cost about the same amount as Windows server software, especially if you use xfs in a supported manner, and you will need to pay yearly.
I agree about the remote access. The fewer ways a box can be hit by untrusted parties, the better.
Of course, W2012 and W2012R2 do bring some nice features (better filesystem and LVM replacement, deduplication, autotiering), but for an existing app server, it is highly likely it may not be worth the time to upgrade to it [2].
[1]: I'm assuming you need commercial production Linux with a support contract which makes auditors happy, and certified FIPS/Common Criteria compliance.
[2]: IMHO, "upgrading" Windows from any major rev consists of a complete box rebuild. Trying to go from W2008 to W2012 may mean leaving too much OS cruft behind which can cause issues later.
The real noise is the link spam crap. When I search for stuff I get pages with my search terms but nothing else but ads or nothing related. Or worse I get unrelated pages without my search terms at all.
It used to be you could require that results contain a term by using +"term", but it doesn't work any more.
Basically, Google is now being more "helpful" in returning results that seem to match, but don't really.
Not unless I really need it. Here, this is an analogy. Go to any decent research library and tell them that they need to burn all the books older than three years old and see how long it is before the mob tears you to shreds.
The money the Fed is printing has to go somewhere. It certainly ain't going to the man in the street.
I'm not interested in an erasable Internet. The beauty of the Internet is how it saves data, conversation, ideas across time and makes them accessible to people now and in the future. The Internet is a repository of knowledge. Sure you have to filter out garbage, but that has always been the case since we first evolved memories.
The future of the internet is everything being safely and securely stored and accessible.
If I may be so bold as to state this, calling social sciences books information is a bit of a joke in my opinion. I generally consider such books a good way to start a barbecue in fact. And actually, a lot of engineering related information on the internet is incorrect due to Arduino users making uninformed statements about mass production consumer electronics.
Sheldon?
It may not be pretty but the older stuff is often where the solid information is - a lot of the new stuff is noise with little long term value.
All I know is I want to leave Google as soon as possible. Bing is not an alternative and no other players seem to have the ability to compete. It's getting harder and harder to find stuff with Google search, it makes way way too many assumptions about my searches. Terms with multiple meanings are all but useless if you're not looking for the "popular" term. Image search got a lot better, then they forced people into conservative by default search. Commercial/"pretty" sites seem to have been pushed to the top instead of ones with solid information. Gmail they screwed the interface up in a big way and then added moronic features like "recent images" [faceplam]. Add to their backwards momentum on search they've been sacrificing goodwill on just about every property they have trying to push people into other crap like Google+.
Android? Forced apps like Facebook which drain the battery, lack of what I wanted from Android: openness. I don't want to have to choose between rooting my phone and keeping the warranty with my carrier.
I honestly can't think of a single Google product that I want to use or recommend to someone else - the only reason I stick with them is because there's no better alternative yet.
Is Unix Dead?
Will Martians Invade?
Is Pope Catholic?
Will Made-Ya-Look News Ever Cease
Google did not copy millions of books with little regard for the law. They were found by a court of law to have fully complied with the law. They copied millions of books *LEGALLY*. They followed copyright law. They may have gone right up to the edge of the law, but they respected it and did not cross it.
To be fair, he did say anything on the internet older than 3 years. He made no reference to printed materials.
I don't get it? Do you only use the internet for searching for computer stuff? Whenever I need to replace a fuse in my 1999 Jeep, I search for it on the internet. Not many people have commented on these albums in the past 3 years, it was all laid down like a decade ago. Same goes for music - most of the information I want is about music that was not composed in the last 3 years.
Is it that hard to ad "windows 8" if you know what OS you want. It's like me searching "Jeep 1999 cherokee sport fuse box" instead of "Jeep cherokee sport fuse box." Makes quite a difference.
Google is close to unusable unless you manually set it to show recent results. Old stuff on the internet is mostly noise and rot.
I bet more than 95% of everything older than 3 years is noise and rot that nobody has any use for.
Good troll there guy. It is completely fitting that anyone who is older than about 40, does not view the world through redneck sun glasses and knows their shit, can rebuke your little bit of bullshit with one fact. Kristallnacht would have needed to be postponed by Himmler and Goebbels if their little book burning experiments were not a success starting back in 1933under a thinly disguised guise of an educational undertaking. Had the peoples complacency not proved to them that the people were asleep to the real purpose of the removal and control of information by the Nazis then the NSDAP might not have even achieved complete power. Hitler would not have been successful without the manipulation of history and it might have become completely transparent to those who stopped to read some non-state approved books the real intent in controlling information before almost an entire generation of Germans joined in with the SS on a crusade to commit genocide.
AM I PISSED that people today especially in the United States are starting to fall into the same trap and think that state security can be compromised by freedom of information...YOU SHOULD BE, Snowden is correct there needs to be a separation of information and state PERIOD. If this means that some are sued or even prosecuted for hate speech or the falsification of information to manipulate the public for political gains, then this is the price we must pay for DEMOCRACY. It is a price many of our fathers and mothers paid for with their very lives, to erase the archives within the net is akin to burning books and it must be prevented.
This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
I don't think you can ask that question at all without first discussing if an "erasable internet" is even possible.
Snapchat proves that it's not only possible, but that it's also a rather popular idea.
Use quotes around words, or enable "verbatim results" in the options. The + thing was misunderstood and misused by most users, and they figured experts could RTFM.
What goes on Internet stays on Internet.
Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization):
---
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:
http://start64.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5851:apk-hosts-file-engine-64bit-version&catid=26:64bit-security-software&Itemid=74
(Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)
Summary:
---
A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4127345&cid=44701775
B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3985079&cid=44310431 w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,
C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).
---
* Addons are more complex + slowup browsers in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see) Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE: I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts ( A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself )
APK
P.S.=> * "A fool makes things bigger + more complex: It takes a touch of genius & a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction." - Einstein
** "Less is more" = GOOD engineering!
*** "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"
...apk
Snapchat proves that it's not only possible,
You mean the one that various apps and workaround exist for to keep the supposedly deleted content?
Yeah, bonehead.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Robots.txt file does this already? Or am I mistaken?
Quotes around words doesn't guarantee you get that exact string. For example "LGA 2011" and "LGA2011" sometimes return results with the other version as the only one on the page. I think it's a "synonym" for Google, so they return both. Granted, with quotes, you get the version you type much more often than the other.
I hadn't known about "Verbatim", but it's a still a pain to have to change the results after you see them. It would be nice to have something I could type in the search box. I might be able to add "&tbs=li:1" (which enables "verbatim") to my default Firefox Google search, though.
Privoxy, NoScript, AdBlock etc are your friends.
An erasable internet is a mistake. The technology of information storage is extremely important.
However, broad, opt-in privacy laws are an absolute necessity to safeguard the integrity of individual freedom so we can continue to improve the quality of human life around the globe. Those arguing against this are protecting their own greedy power/monetary interests.
What we desperately need, in the U.S. at least, is for these broad privacy laws to be set in constitutional stone. Without them, our grand experiment will fail fantastically.
Privacy is a human NEED and the only thing standing between us and tyranny. Those who hold all the privacy keys control all. Period.
It's all connected & Edward Snowden is a Human-race Hero for getting this conversation started. Let's not let obfuscation and propaganda derail this - its for our future and all our sakes.
How do you manage to do things where the advice has mostly become outdated or obsolete in 3 years? Have you considered that maybe you focus way too much on ephemeral crap?
This is going to sound silly, but I think Snapchat was the most important technology of 2013.
Mind that it's a WSJ article, and the author [very] likely has stock in Snapchat.
It's a funny, connected, world we live in nowadays.
I don't think you can ask that question at all without first discussing if an "erasable internet" is even possible.
Snapchat proves that it's not only possible, but that it's also a rather popular idea.
Before you get modded funny or troll, I'll bite- I've never used snapchat, but rather considered what I'd heard about it laughable for precisely the quote you responded to. Tell me, assuming that any accessor of the data on these 'erasable services' can just aim a VHS camcorder at the screen of their internet device, what exactly is prevented? We already have 'robots.txt' and similar methods to enable content not to be scraped (if the accessors do it voluntarily, just like voluntarily not aiming that VHS camcorder at the snapchat). So I just don't understand what new angle is being presented by snapchat, and I truly am too lazy to visit their website.
How about starting by defining what you mean by the term "erasable internet"? It could mean LOTS of different things.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
If Internet Relay Chat hasn't killed Google, how will Snapchat kill Google?
Snapchat does not improve anyones privacy. It would be nieve to think that the OS, browser, various plugins, ISP, various helper apps would not have cached the "erasable data".
What really needs to happen and what politicans like to dance around so as to avoid addressing is that ownership of personal data has to be clearly defined and re-purposing of shared personal data needs to be banned.
Actually, at least 99% of everything after 2000 is noise or sounds of the brain farting.
Most of the good information on the web was created prior to that time.
I log all my IRC chats. So it's certainly not erasable there. Many IRC channels - especially those supporting open source - are logged, published, and distributed; again not erasable there.
Sure, you can setup a new channel or have a one-to-one conversation with someone over IRC; but you still have no guarantee that no one in the middle is not logging the data or that the party on the other side is not logging the (unencrypted for them) data.
Many IRC channels - especially those supporting open source - are logged, published, and distributed; again not erasable there.
And many IRC channels ban publication of logs. For example, #wikipedia on Freenode has had a policy in the topic line: "public logging -> public flogging".
but you still have no guarantee that no one in the middle is not logging the data
Some chat clients support "off-the-record" messaging, which sets up a key exchange.
or that the party on the other side is not logging the (unencrypted for them) data.
Nor does Snapchat guarantee that the party on the other side hasn't wiped, unlocked, and rooted his device and isn't using a second device as a camera.
It's still scary how many of them want to use several large breadboards filled with expensive components to do things that you can do with a single operational amplifier. Also annoying is their hate for SMD components, considering those are actually easier to solder...
Pity users cannot erase junk that pollutes the Internet with stupid comments.
This article would vanish in a jiffy.
Hate to break it to you, but people post stuff in forums that had nothing to do with anything so ephemeral as 'state of the art' computer os's, languages, hardware etc. Sometimes even completely non-computer related!
There's a whole world of stuff much older than three years out there that's deeply useful to a lot of people other than yourself.
I guess on /. this is flame bait - especially posted as AC, but seriously, your stated opinion smacks of book burning.
How do you manage to do things where the advice has mostly become outdated or obsolete in 3 years? Have you considered that maybe you focus way too much on ephemeral crap?
Welcome to the world of technology. That's how it works.
I'm not searching for how to shoe a horse. I'm looking for the best way to fix the broken glass on my phone, product reviews for holidays gifts, etc.
Have you seriously posted 6 times in this thread to say the same thing?
There are some sites that have vanished from the Internet entirely already. If way back machine didn't know about them and they're offline, it's a bitch to find any trace of them at all.
I use DuckDuckGo and Startpage mostly now for search. When I need to map directions I jump directly to google maps.