Recent notes

Fri 2020-06-26 15:54

Dangerously naive statement of the day:

Gopher is faster than the rest of the Internet, because opening Gopher pages doesn't entail downloading megabytes of Javascipt. And, no SSL handshaking occurs. The lack of SSL in gopherspace is not a problem, because no one is spying on you in gopherspace the way they are on the rest of the Internet. [emphasis mine]


No. Just... No.

This is a perfect example of how the rose-colored glasses of retro-tech fetishism can blind one to the realities and challenges of the modern age. Of course gopherspace is spied upon. All Internet traffic is spied upon. That is why HTTPS was invented. If you use the Gopher protocol to read Internet content then, due to the inherent limitations of the protocol, what you read is with certainty not private. It's all clear text, easily captured (and/or changed) by any device in the path between your computer and the Gopher server on which you are accessing the content.

I understand the appeal of having information available in the fast, accessible form of plain text. But in 2020, we can't just dismiss very real security and privacy concerns by saying "no problem, nobody's watching anyway." What I choose to read or view on the Internet should be nobody's business but my own. Further, I should be able to determine with certainty the source of the information I'm accessing, and that the information is being received in its original, unaltered form.

The problems with the modern Web are not inherent to the HTTP and HTTPS protocols. This website is served over HTTPS. It has no tracking code, no cookies, and uses very limited Javascript. This site remains usable even in a text-based web browser. Because I choose to code this site in such a manner. The problems with the modern Web are not technical, they are people problems that can be solved if web designers and programmers would only choose not to use the antisocial elements that make the modern Web so terrible.

There are projects like Gemini that seek to modernize Gopher. I applaud the authors for not dismissing the objective shortcomings of Gopher and instead actually trying to fix them. However, I do tend to think they are barking up the wrong tree. They are trying to solve the problems of feature abuse with a supply-side solution: restricting the available capabilities such that features which might possibly be abused are simply not available. Setting aside that this approach generally doesn't work (see: Prohibition, the War on Drugs, etc.), it also overlooks the history of why HTTP overtook Gopher in the first place - because it was the more flexible, extensible protocol.

Tue 2020-06-23 23:41

So, the President of the United States tweets a statement that Rule of Law will be enforced in our nation's capitol:

There will never be an “Autonomous Zone” in Washington, D.C., as long as I’m your President. If they try they will be met with serious force!

And Twitter puts an advisory on the tweet:

This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules about abusive behavior. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public's interest for the Tweet to remain accessible.

Because Twitter calls the President's statement of fact a "threat of harm".

SMFH. Well, I guess that's scientific evidence that TDS is a real thing. Or it's a sign that Twitter has finally jumped the shark and gone from a fetid cesspool of human discourse, to an asylum run by the inmates that is now on fire.

If Jack Dorsey had a group of anarchists peaceful protesters forcibly take over his neighborhood and declare an "autonomous zone," I'm guessing he'd be on the phone to the police within seconds demanding the use of "serious force" to remove them. It's all fun and games until it's your house getting burned down.

Mon 2020-06-22 15:24

Apparently, Andrew Yang is fine with perpetuating our dystopic surveillance culture as long as Big Tech gives token payments to its users for all of the personal data they siphon up. Setting aside the fact that this pipe dream will never happen - purely for reasons of corporate finance - users of Big Tech platforms are already getting paid for their data. They are exchanging their data for digital services. Why should those platforms sweeten the deal with cash payments that would basically destroy their profit model? Google and Facebook aren't charities, and they aren't public utilities.

If you don't like surveillance capitalism, then convince Big Tech to offer a direct capitalism alternative and pay for the services you use. Seems like that would be a common sense idea to anyone who doesn't live in the "I want everything for free" mentality. I didn't think my opinion of Andrew Yang could get much lower but he keeps pushing that bar down. Next week he'll probably suggest that Apple should pay people to own the latest iPhone because people want iPhones, Apple has lots of money, and it's not fair that you have to pay for stuff.

Latest articles

How much is data ownership worth?

  • Article
  • Published:
  • Updated:

From email to chat, cloud storage to social networking, there are personal financial costs to self-hosting your own information services infrastructure and freeing your data from centralized platforms like Google and Facebook. Looking at those costs may show you how much your data is worth to the companies that siphon it up.

Read more

Project updates

Repository Last commit Updated (UTC)
personal-shortener doc update (markdown fix) 2020-02-05 01:53
personal-pastebin doc update 2020-02-05 01:49
redball million dollar bug 2019-11-21 04:46
ELLIS updated links 2019-09-30 00:09
dotfiles OCD is a PITA 2019-05-03 00:36

Newest photos