Terrifying thing I learned once: if you donate your body to science it turns out they can also often use it for art.
To be clear, I'm not in any way saying that they should - just that I can see it as a possibility!
If we define it as technology-assisted one-to-many bi-directional communication (therefore ruling out the telephone, letters, and so on), I think there's an argument to be made that it was the newspaper. In the old days, particularly pre-television, local papers in particular would have a lot of mini-stories just about what people were doing with their lives. If we define "technology" as "the internet", I think it probably really is finger - 1971 is pretty early on, pre-dating usenet by almost a decade and mailing lists by more than that.
I'd love to see an intelligent UX tool for the web. But UX goes beyond visual and flows - I wish we had a tool for integrating human-centered design with the software development process. Why can't we store POVs and prototypes in GitHub? We should be able to address them from issues and PRs.
Great tips! I’m a big fan of NextJS, and it’s lovely to see webmentions made so easy for that ecosystem.
I like it a lot so far! But ask me again once I’ve actually written a whole book with it ;)
As founder and lead of Known, and as a technical leader in open source and edtech since 2004, I endorse this project completely. Too many projects are built with the assumption of an always-on internet. The people who are in most need of these resources often don't have access to them. This project will do great work to redress the balance.
Totally. This is what I was doing before I came to ForUsAll. It's super easy to use - the barrier to entry is really the blockchain ecosystem itself (and a few niggles with the account-based checkout for people who don't have wallets).
I pulled an older one - will fix this plugin up and release it. See https://unlock-protocol.com for protocol docs though. It's really easy to use.
Nowhere, anymore! I should bring it back and put it somewhere.
I think this is exactly spot on, and I see two societal pillars that can support these kinds of small communities: journalism and academia. Particularly in support of local or niche journalism, smaller communities can actually provide support and better reporting. And for academia, discussion is clearly a core part of learning.
I don't think existing startups can provide the infrastructure that's required here. I'm a bit jaded about open source at this point, too, but giving these institutions the building blocks is going to be important.
And the biggest thing of all: better hosting that actually makes all of this much easier than it currently is.
Indeed! I do think there are legitimate uses, but the optics are awful to say the least, and the whole area smells.
I love this!
There’s one thing I disagree with in your list, and one from the original, that I think is worth unpicking:
1. “Learn a bit of HTML.” I don’t think that should be necessary; a world where anyone who publishes is using HTML isn’t achievable or even necessarily desirable. And it creates a situation where people with technical skills have elite status over people that don’t.
2. “Make tools for yourself.” The premise is flawed. Made-up personas are certainly a bad idea, and creating software without having a user in mind is also terrible. But if we all just build for ourselves, the result is software for technical people. That’s kind of boring, but also counter to the mission of the indieweb as I see it. Instead, I’d propose: “Make tools for real people you care about.” That could be you; it could be your partner, or your family, or a community you want to support. It turns indieweb into an outward-facing, open endeavor instead of an introverted one, while staying true to the ideal of building for real people.
I’m utterly inspired by Appolition and apps like it. We should have a compassionate society and infrastructure that allows everyone a real chance. But we don’t, so if there are ways to take matters into our own hands (while pressuring government), so be it.
Genuine, voluntary distribution of wealth from those with the ability to those according to their need. My view is that this is a simplified (likely oversimplified) version of what governments need to be doing to support those in need, but here we are. Needs must.
There would be no questions asked about what the money would be used for. If you need it and you qualify, it’s yours. The central account would distribute to neighborhood ATMs according to the local need, with contributions drawn from everywhere.
Withdrawal cards would be distributed by local aid organizations and linked to a specific neighborhood ATM. (Not a bank ATM: a separate machine.) The monthly withdrawal limit would be set according to circumstance according to a rubric; eg, a parent with kids would need more.
Werd I/O © Ben Werdmuller. The text (without images) of this site is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.
Share this post