Tim Berners-Lee Moves Forward With His Big Plan To Fix The Web By Bringing Back Its Original Decentralized Promise

from the good-to-see dept

Here we go. For years I've been talking about how we really need to move the web to a world of protocols instead of platforms. The key concept is that so much of the web has been taken over by internet giants who have built data silos. There are all sorts of problems with this. For one, when those platforms are where the majority of people get their information, it makes them into the arbiters of truth when that should make us quite uncomfortable. Second, it creates a privacy nightmare where hugely valuable data stores are single points of failure for all your data (even when those platforms have strong security, just having so much data held by one source is dangerous). Finally, it really takes us far, far away from the true promise of cloud computing, which was supposed to be a situation where we separated out the data and the application layers and could point multiple applications at the same data. Instead, we got silos where you're relying on a single provider to host both the data and the application (which also raises privacy concerns).

Despite some people raising these issues for quite some time, there hasn't been much public discussion of them until just recently (in large part, I believe, driven by the growing worries about how the big platforms have become so powerful). A few companies here or there have been trying to move us towards a world of protocols instead of platforms, and one key project to watch is coming from the inventor of the web himself, Tim Berners-Lee. He had announced his project Solid a while back: an attempt to separate out the data layer, allowing end users to control that data and have much more control over what applications could access it. I've been excited about the project, but just last week I commented to someone that it wasn't clear how much progress had actually been made.

Then, last Friday, Berners-Lee announced that he's doubling down on the project, to the point that he's taken a sabbatical from MIT and reduced his involvement with the W3C to focus on a new company to be built around Solid called inrupt. inrupt's new CEO also has a blog post about this, which admittedly comes off as a bit odd. It seems to suggest that the reason to form inrupt was not necessarily that Solid has made a lot of forward progress, but rather than it needs money, and the only way to get some is to set up a company:

Solid as an open-source project had been facing the normal challenges: vying for attention and lacking the necessary resources to realize its true potential. The solution was to establish a company that could bring resources, process and appropriate skills to make the promise of Solid a reality. There are plenty of examples of a commercial entity serving as the catalyst for an open-source project, to bolster the community with the energy and infrastructure of a commercial venture.

And so we started planning inrupt - a company to do just that. Inrupt’s mission is to ensure that Solid becomes widely adopted by developers, businesses, and eventually … everyone; that it becomes part of the fabric of the web. Tim, as our CTO, has committed his time and talent to the company, and I am delighted to be its chief executive. We also have an exceptional investor as part of the team.

I'm certainly hopeful that something significant comes of this, as it truly is an opportunity to move the internet into that kind of more distributed, less centralized/silo'd world that shows off the true power of the web. I have heard some grousing among some people that this is just Tim Berners-Lee just rebranding the concept of the Semantic Web that he started pushing nearly two decades ago, without any real traction. And, of course, there have been plenty of other attempts over the decades to build these kinds of systems. As it stands right now, there are a few other projects that are getting some traction, including the more distributed social platform Mastodon or some of the ideas that have come out of IndieWeb.

That said, we may finally be entering an era where both users and companies alike are recognizing the benefits of a more distributed web and the downsides of a more centralized one. So it really does feel like there's an opportunity to embrace these concepts, and it's good to see the founder of the world wide web ramping up his efforts on this. If it produces real, workable solutions, that would obviously be fantastic, but at the very least if it gets more people just thinking about these concepts, that would also be useful. So, this should be seen as big news for anyone concerned about the powers of the largest internet companies (especially if you're skeptical about government trying to step in to deal with those companies when they don't know what they're doing). While the details and implementation will matter quite a bit, it's exciting to see more movement towards a world in which the data layer is not just separated out, but where end users will be able to fully control that layer themselves, and potentially choose which apps can access what (and for how long). It certainly opens up a real opportunity to bring back the early promise of a truly decentralized web... and that would be a web built on protocols rather than centralized, silo'd platforms.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: applications, control, data, decentralization, distributed web, protocols, silos, solid, tim berners-lee
Companies: inrupt

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Oct 2018 @ 2:57am

    I've looked into TBL's 'solution' to A problem. It's a solution to the wrong problem. The actual problem is social and political, not technical, and it won't be fixed by technical solutions.

    The problem is that many (most?) people like convenience and value their time and simplicity of solutions over their privacy. This has always been the case.

    One stop shops are extremely popular and generally make considerably more money than specialty shops that cater to particular clients. This is the Wal Mart Problem. Only now it's migrated online to giants like Amazon, Facebook, Google, Steam, etc.

    The basic problem is this: When offered easy and convenient solutions for either free or very inexpensive, most people are going to pick easy and convenient with 'good enough quality' (Wal Mart) over expensive and similar or better quality but less convenient (Mom & Pop specialty). This is what ended up making ghost towns of a lot of small town downtowns back in the 70s & 80s. Wal Mart and a mall would come to town, Wal Mart would undersell everyone while the malls would draw the remaining big box brands (Sears, JC Penny, Dillard's) out to the outskirts of towns. Downtown couldn't compete and the shops went under, no one replaced them because no one could get enough business once the traffic was going elsewhere.

    The same phenomenon is at work on the web. Amazon is basically the Wal Mart of Internet commerce while Facebook and Google have dominant positions with services that are easy, 'free', and all your friends are already using them. Malls were as much a social phenomenon as economic- you'd go there to see a movie, have a meal, and talk to your friends and that's what's happening with Facebook and Google services.

    The only way to compete with this is either regulatory: enact ordinances that limit or ban Wal Mart and mall construction, or in the Internet case, restrict use on the actual products - which in this case are the accumulated customer data; or it's creating services that don't have hidden gotchas. Out Wal Marting Wal Mart, in essence. Or recreating the space such that it doesn't compete at all (parks, or non-retail zoning, as examples.) Such efforts have been done to various degrees of success. But frankly, centralization is a fact of life. There are political, social, and resource reasons for trends towards centralization and forming monopolies. TBL's solution addresses none of them.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.