Timeline for robotics list by rozzin, page 67
rozzin
robotics
Thursday, 29-Nov-0001 19:00:00 EST
-
@consciousobserver, what I really want for my blog is little hyperlinked `this part has been revised' indicators all over the page, sort-of like are all over #CLtL2 except less intrusive than that (because CLtL2 is paper and can't support hyperlinks, both unlike my blog). Something like, say, footnote markers+links that let everyone roll back and look at the diffs at every stage.
-
@rozzin more than the revision history built into WordPress?
-
@resumer @knuthollund Yes, whether the post is removed is entirely up to the receiving side. Think of !gnusocial nodes as feed readers. It's up to the reader to decide whether to cache or not. It's a public network, and everyone using it should be aware that it is.
(our strength is not _data privacy_, but decentralisation and interoperability)
-
@mmn, there are definitely people for whom the real glory of `online publishing' is that (they think) it means `never having to print a retraction'. ☺ e.g.: http://thequickbrown.com/stories/stage-set-for-jackson-spectacul/index.html http://status.hackerposse.com/url/9694 #righttobeforgotten?
-
@resumer You're still going to have the federated copies lying around. Anyone anywhere can store copies and none of us can (or should be able to) delete stuff from another person's harddrive. I don't see anyone requesting the ability to remotely delete e-mails from another user's inbox, a submission to the the "opinions" part of a local newspaper or stuff like that so…
-
It still annoys the heck out of me that blogs (including mine) aren't revision-controlled. I find the usability of manually-inserted "[EDIT: I changed this from... to...]" to be pretty atrocious--both as a writer and a reader. It was OK when we were publishing by distributing *paper*, but we should be able to do better on the Internet. #Dammit.
-
I always thought of maintaining #revision history of the timeline as an explicit #feature, rather than just something for people without forethought to be afraid of ne'er-do-wells setting up. ☺
-
Years ago, long before GNU social or StatusNet or #ActivityStreams, I remember actually working on something similar (more like a #MUD...) with reified actions that distributed over the network; it was my intention w/ _that_ (though I never actually got there) to be able to publish #REVISION actions and also have them propagate in the same way as less meta actions.
-
If there's mountains of evidence contradicting someone's statement, that we can all trace back to multiple reputable sources (e.g.: because too many people/archives `refuse to forget'), then we can all judge--from that--that someone's lying. But something about making non-repudiation `too built-in' doesn't sit right with me.
-
I think I may kind-of prefer a world in which it's still _technically_ possible for someone to claim `I didn't say that, it's a made-up quotation' even when they really did.
-
On the other hand, the idea of cryptosigning _everything_, building nonrepudiation into the comms system at too low a level, also kind-of creeps me out when it comes up....
-
Other things that I _can_ see wanting `to have never published'..., it seems like there are just too many of those that creep me out. Like, some of the stuff on http://thequickbrown.com/ and probably lots of things affected by http://status.hackerposse.com/url/9694
-
Typos and rotted hyperlinks don't really give me the sort of `oh no' feeling that would make me want to actually erase the record, though—and I think it's actually at least a little useful to see the history of changes there.
-
I also semi-frequently #wish that I could publish a #revision to now-rotted hyperlinks....
-
I do, in some sense, occasionally `wish that I could un-publish' a #typo..., but really that's more properly `I #wish I could publish a #revision [without confusing everyone else's timelines like a "s/ypot/typo/" postscript does]'.
Joshua Judson Rosen
Conscious Observer
MMN-o ✅⃠
All Hacker Poesy content and data are available under the