-- Leo's gemini proxy
-- Connecting to gemini.techrights.org:1965...
-- Connected
-- Sending request
-- Meta line: 20 text/gemini;lang=en-GB
Gemini version available ♊︎
Posted in Free/Libre Software, Standard at 10:32 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
The NON-Manifesto Manifesto, or a number of key points to consider
> Image: The Wall
No more paywalls, artificial obstructions, and planned obsolescence
Summary: An informal list of considerations to make when reshaping the Internet to better serve people, not a few corporations that are mostly military contractors subsidised by the American taxpayers
All protocols should be secure by design; back doors, however “well-meant”, invalidate them and forbid their use in any shape or formThe Internet should be divided into protocols, each of which excels at one single thingPages should be treated as pages, not an as assembly of computer programs (tying them together on a canvas)Pages should be made accessible to all, including blind peopleProtocols and implementations should be Free (libre) softwareA protocol is admitted and accepted only if many parties implement and deploy instances of itCentralisation disqualifies oneself (e.g. one site monopolising a protocol)Monoculture disqualifies oneself (e.g. one application monopolising a protocol)Protocols and implementations must conform to a “least complex” attitude/principle; simplicity is to be favoured over supposed power, for the betterment and advancement of a true technical diversityAnonymous access (e.g. Tor or unlogged sessions) should be permitted; in some countries it’s a matter of life or deathDNS should be considered not mandatory; there’s a broad range of alternatives to it and they should be actively encouragedGeo-blocking is not permitted; it facilitates racism, which has no room in societyParties that implement DRM should be shunned and led to failure, setting an example for anyone else wishing to follow their leadParticipation in military (including spy agencies’) programs subjects oneself to greater scrutiny, suspicion, and even prejudiced rejectionFile and transmission neutrality should be presumed benign and desirable; it’s a violation of human rights to presume any user is a law-breakerCensorship, including bans, should be considered a “last resort” subject to very strict standards and regarded as a highly exceptional circumstance; there are ways to repel unwanted people/views without outright bansCopyright law should be dealt with as a potential barrier to preservation; when a last remaining copy online is no longer available online, it should be perfectly lawful for a party with an offline copy to upload it somewhereThrottling or traffic-shaping should be advisory only; people can be encouraged, not forced, to limit or change their usage/utility of the network; this should be done transparently, not covertly, and not by network operators with a financial stake in the outcome (or business partners with a stake)Any expansion of existing protocols should be done with diligence and care, taking into account compatibility with old devices, environmental factors, and a balance between advancement and this planet’s natural limitsStandards bodies dominated by large corporations (vendor capture) can be ignored and disregarded
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink > Image: Mail
Send this to a friend
----------
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
-- Response ended
-- Page fetched on Mon May 13 06:20:04 2024