Discussion:
[urbit] Design of a digital republic
Aaron Beckerman
2015-10-28 14:28:36 UTC
Permalink
Hi everyone,

There's an essay, "Design of a digital republic: part 1, goals", on the
Urbit website:

http://urbit.org/docs/theory/network-goals

It's also on Medium:

https://medium.com/@urbit/design-of-a-digital-republic-f2b6b3109902

It's about the plan for making a Urbit a decentralized network. "Thus
what seems like an optimal political design: the ugly, centralized,
young larva that’s designed to molt into a beautiful, mature,
decentralized butterfly."

If you think this hypothetical metamorphosis is wicked cool, as I do,
then you might have questions about the ownership of Urbit's 256
galaxies. For example: How many different owners are there? How many
galaxies are held as thanks for donating money to the Urbit project? Who
owns |Attila|?

To help you answer questions like these, I've compiled information about
the galaxies into a JSON file. (It's entirely unofficial and may be
inaccurate.) You can get it here:

https://gist.github.com/ab9/b10fd296302032c82bed

(Answers to the above questions: 51, 10, Jaan Tallinn.)

Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
c***@gmail.com
2015-10-28 23:28:06 UTC
Permalink
Very nice! I was always under the impression ~zod was "|Tianming|" for the
"mandate of heaven" part (comets are automatically children of ~zod, it's
the "prime galaxy", etc.), didn't even know there was an emperor with that
title. Perhaps we should re-do the titles, name them after nebulae and
galaxies instead now :p

I've always been slightly uneasy about how many galaxies are already
allocated, but it makes sense to at least discourage people from using the
names themselves. People are less likely to mod in their own public key
hash and fork the network for an allocated name, even if it's not in use,
than they are for one blank. They are also (most likely) people or
companies of repute, and so likely to be better rulers than randos on the
internet that allocated themselves a /4 block.
Post by Aaron Beckerman
Hi everyone,
There's an essay, "Design of a digital republic: part 1, goals", on the
http://urbit.org/docs/theory/network-goals
It's about the plan for making a Urbit a decentralized network. "Thus
what seems like an optimal political design: the ugly, centralized,
young larva that’s designed to molt into a beautiful, mature,
decentralized butterfly."
If you think this hypothetical metamorphosis is wicked cool, as I do,
then you might have questions about the ownership of Urbit's 256
galaxies. For example: How many different owners are there? How many
galaxies are held as thanks for donating money to the Urbit project? Who
owns |Attila|?
To help you answer questions like these, I've compiled information about
the galaxies into a JSON file. (It's entirely unofficial and may be
https://gist.github.com/ab9/b10fd296302032c82bed
(Answers to the above questions: 51, 10, Jaan Tallinn.)
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Curtis Yarvin
2015-10-28 23:48:48 UTC
Permalink
I think the simple, austere syllables are awe-inspiring enough.

There's actually a lot to be said for "randos" whose galactic emperor
status was achieved basically by being in the right place at the right
time. It mimics the the distribution of property in the real world,
which is not particularly correlated with merit in any sense. Some of
these randos may be better stewards than others, but we can argue
effectively and convincingly that the prospects of them colluding for
sinister purposes are quite remote. Since this is what keeps the
network effectively decentralized, it matters quite a bit. Also, an
owner is one thing and a property manager is another...
Post by c***@gmail.com
Very nice! I was always under the impression ~zod was "|Tianming|" for the
"mandate of heaven" part (comets are automatically children of ~zod, it's
the "prime galaxy", etc.), didn't even know there was an emperor with that
title. Perhaps we should re-do the titles, name them after nebulae and
galaxies instead now :p
I've always been slightly uneasy about how many galaxies are already
allocated, but it makes sense to at least discourage people from using the
names themselves. People are less likely to mod in their own public key hash
and fork the network for an allocated name, even if it's not in use, than
they are for one blank. They are also (most likely) people or companies of
repute, and so likely to be better rulers than randos on the internet that
allocated themselves a /4 block.
Post by Aaron Beckerman
Hi everyone,
There's an essay, "Design of a digital republic: part 1, goals", on the
http://urbit.org/docs/theory/network-goals
It's about the plan for making a Urbit a decentralized network. "Thus
what seems like an optimal political design: the ugly, centralized,
young larva that’s designed to molt into a beautiful, mature,
decentralized butterfly."
If you think this hypothetical metamorphosis is wicked cool, as I do,
then you might have questions about the ownership of Urbit's 256
galaxies. For example: How many different owners are there? How many
galaxies are held as thanks for donating money to the Urbit project? Who
owns |Attila|?
To help you answer questions like these, I've compiled information about
the galaxies into a JSON file. (It's entirely unofficial and may be
https://gist.github.com/ab9/b10fd296302032c82bed
(Answers to the above questions: 51, 10, Jaan Tallinn.)
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
J LeBlanc
2015-10-29 03:52:36 UTC
Permalink
It could just be me, but I've always thought the ownership model was the most interesting and compelling thing about Urbit.



Thanks!----

J LeBlanc

***@wustl.edu

314-609-3782
Post by Curtis Yarvin
I think the simple, austere syllables are awe-inspiring enough.
There's actually a lot to be said for "randos" whose galactic emperor
status was achieved basically by being in the right place at the right
time. It mimics the the distribution of property in the real world,
which is not particularly correlated with merit in any sense. Some of
these randos may be better stewards than others, but we can argue
effectively and convincingly that the prospects of them colluding for
sinister purposes are quite remote. Since this is what keeps the
network effectively decentralized, it matters quite a bit. Also, an
owner is one thing and a property manager is another...
Post by c***@gmail.com
Very nice! I was always under the impression ~zod was "|Tianming|" for the
"mandate of heaven" part (comets are automatically children of ~zod, it's
the "prime galaxy", etc.), didn't even know there was an emperor with that
title. Perhaps we should re-do the titles, name them after nebulae and
galaxies instead now :p
I've always been slightly uneasy about how many galaxies are already
allocated, but it makes sense to at least discourage people from using the
names themselves. People are less likely to mod in their own public key hash
and fork the network for an allocated name, even if it's not in use, than
they are for one blank. They are also (most likely) people or companies of
repute, and so likely to be better rulers than randos on the internet that
allocated themselves a /4 block.
Post by Aaron Beckerman
Hi everyone,
There's an essay, "Design of a digital republic: part 1, goals", on the
http://urbit.org/docs/theory/network-goals
It's about the plan for making a Urbit a decentralized network. "Thus
what seems like an optimal political design: the ugly, centralized,
young larva that’s designed to molt into a beautiful, mature,
decentralized butterfly."
If you think this hypothetical metamorphosis is wicked cool, as I do,
then you might have questions about the ownership of Urbit's 256
galaxies. For example: How many different owners are there? How many
galaxies are held as thanks for donating money to the Urbit project? Who
owns |Attila|?
To help you answer questions like these, I've compiled information about
the galaxies into a JSON file. (It's entirely unofficial and may be
https://gist.github.com/ab9/b10fd296302032c82bed
(Answers to the above questions: 51, 10, Jaan Tallinn.)
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Adam Bliss
2015-10-29 15:59:08 UTC
Permalink
Is there a Kelvin Version for this metaphor? I (~lyd) been at least a Duke,
an Emperor, a Carrier, and now apparently a Galaxy?

--Adam
Post by c***@gmail.com
Very nice! I was always under the impression ~zod was "|Tianming|" for the
"mandate of heaven" part (comets are automatically children of ~zod, it's
the "prime galaxy", etc.), didn't even know there was an emperor with that
title. Perhaps we should re-do the titles, name them after nebulae and
galaxies instead now :p
I've always been slightly uneasy about how many galaxies are already
allocated, but it makes sense to at least discourage people from using the
names themselves. People are less likely to mod in their own public key
hash and fork the network for an allocated name, even if it's not in use,
than they are for one blank. They are also (most likely) people or
companies of repute, and so likely to be better rulers than randos on the
internet that allocated themselves a /4 block.
Post by Aaron Beckerman
Hi everyone,
There's an essay, "Design of a digital republic: part 1, goals", on the
http://urbit.org/docs/theory/network-goals
It's about the plan for making a Urbit a decentralized network. "Thus
what seems like an optimal political design: the ugly, centralized,
young larva that’s designed to molt into a beautiful, mature,
decentralized butterfly."
If you think this hypothetical metamorphosis is wicked cool, as I do,
then you might have questions about the ownership of Urbit's 256
galaxies. For example: How many different owners are there? How many
galaxies are held as thanks for donating money to the Urbit project? Who
owns |Attila|?
To help you answer questions like these, I've compiled information about
the galaxies into a JSON file. (It's entirely unofficial and may be
https://gist.github.com/ab9/b10fd296302032c82bed
(Answers to the above questions: 51, 10, Jaan Tallinn.)
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Steve Dee
2015-10-29 16:06:22 UTC
Permalink
This metaphor is on FIRE
Post by Adam Bliss
Is there a Kelvin Version for this metaphor? I (~lyd) been at least a
Duke, an Emperor, a Carrier, and now apparently a Galaxy?
--Adam
Post by c***@gmail.com
Very nice! I was always under the impression ~zod was "|Tianming|" for
the "mandate of heaven" part (comets are automatically children of ~zod,
it's the "prime galaxy", etc.), didn't even know there was an emperor with
that title. Perhaps we should re-do the titles, name them after nebulae and
galaxies instead now :p
I've always been slightly uneasy about how many galaxies are already
allocated, but it makes sense to at least discourage people from using the
names themselves. People are less likely to mod in their own public key
hash and fork the network for an allocated name, even if it's not in use,
than they are for one blank. They are also (most likely) people or
companies of repute, and so likely to be better rulers than randos on the
internet that allocated themselves a /4 block.
Post by Aaron Beckerman
Hi everyone,
There's an essay, "Design of a digital republic: part 1, goals", on the
http://urbit.org/docs/theory/network-goals
It's about the plan for making a Urbit a decentralized network. "Thus
what seems like an optimal political design: the ugly, centralized,
young larva that’s designed to molt into a beautiful, mature,
decentralized butterfly."
If you think this hypothetical metamorphosis is wicked cool, as I do,
then you might have questions about the ownership of Urbit's 256
galaxies. For example: How many different owners are there? How many
galaxies are held as thanks for donating money to the Urbit project? Who
owns |Attila|?
To help you answer questions like these, I've compiled information about
the galaxies into a JSON file. (It's entirely unofficial and may be
https://gist.github.com/ab9/b10fd296302032c82bed
(Answers to the above questions: 51, 10, Jaan Tallinn.)
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Anton Dyudin
2015-10-29 17:46:08 UTC
Permalink
@ does not remember hosting the metaphor
– ~fyr "Bolivar", galaxy 0xf7
Post by Steve Dee
This metaphor is on FIRE
Post by Adam Bliss
Is there a Kelvin Version for this metaphor? I (~lyd) been at least a
Duke, an Emperor, a Carrier, and now apparently a Galaxy?
--Adam
Post by c***@gmail.com
Very nice! I was always under the impression ~zod was "|Tianming|" for
the "mandate of heaven" part (comets are automatically children of ~zod,
it's the "prime galaxy", etc.), didn't even know there was an emperor with
that title. Perhaps we should re-do the titles, name them after nebulae and
galaxies instead now :p
I've always been slightly uneasy about how many galaxies are already
allocated, but it makes sense to at least discourage people from using the
names themselves. People are less likely to mod in their own public key
hash and fork the network for an allocated name, even if it's not in use,
than they are for one blank. They are also (most likely) people or
companies of repute, and so likely to be better rulers than randos on the
internet that allocated themselves a /4 block.
Post by Aaron Beckerman
Hi everyone,
There's an essay, "Design of a digital republic: part 1, goals", on the
http://urbit.org/docs/theory/network-goals
It's about the plan for making a Urbit a decentralized network. "Thus
what seems like an optimal political design: the ugly, centralized,
young larva that’s designed to molt into a beautiful, mature,
decentralized butterfly."
If you think this hypothetical metamorphosis is wicked cool, as I do,
then you might have questions about the ownership of Urbit's 256
galaxies. For example: How many different owners are there? How many
galaxies are held as thanks for donating money to the Urbit project? Who
owns |Attila|?
To help you answer questions like these, I've compiled information about
the galaxies into a JSON file. (It's entirely unofficial and may be
https://gist.github.com/ab9/b10fd296302032c82bed
(Answers to the above questions: 51, 10, Jaan Tallinn.)
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
c***@gmail.com
2015-10-29 21:34:03 UTC
Permalink
Now my interest is piqued, and I hope you can forgive my curiosity, but how
did you come across a galaxy? I assume that anton got ~fyr in some perverse
equity deal with Tlon (pcmonk also appears to own a galaxy ~tug, but
doesn't use it). Were you an employee at one point, or just got in early?
Post by Adam Bliss
Is there a Kelvin Version for this metaphor? I (~lyd) been at least a
Duke, an Emperor, a Carrier, and now apparently a Galaxy?
--Adam
Post by c***@gmail.com
Very nice! I was always under the impression ~zod was "|Tianming|" for
the "mandate of heaven" part (comets are automatically children of ~zod,
it's the "prime galaxy", etc.), didn't even know there was an emperor with
that title. Perhaps we should re-do the titles, name them after nebulae and
galaxies instead now :p
I've always been slightly uneasy about how many galaxies are already
allocated, but it makes sense to at least discourage people from using the
names themselves. People are less likely to mod in their own public key
hash and fork the network for an allocated name, even if it's not in use,
than they are for one blank. They are also (most likely) people or
companies of repute, and so likely to be better rulers than randos on the
internet that allocated themselves a /4 block.
Post by Aaron Beckerman
Hi everyone,
There's an essay, "Design of a digital republic: part 1, goals", on the
http://urbit.org/docs/theory/network-goals
It's about the plan for making a Urbit a decentralized network. "Thus
what seems like an optimal political design: the ugly, centralized,
young larva that’s designed to molt into a beautiful, mature,
decentralized butterfly."
If you think this hypothetical metamorphosis is wicked cool, as I do,
then you might have questions about the ownership of Urbit's 256
galaxies. For example: How many different owners are there? How many
galaxies are held as thanks for donating money to the Urbit project? Who
owns |Attila|?
To help you answer questions like these, I've compiled information about
the galaxies into a JSON file. (It's entirely unofficial and may be
https://gist.github.com/ab9/b10fd296302032c82bed
(Answers to the above questions: 51, 10, Jaan Tallinn.)
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
<javascript:>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Raymond Pasco
2015-10-29 21:43:22 UTC
Permalink
Latin translations for the curious:

gleba - soil
sator - tailor
angelus - angel
fidelis - faithful
donum - gift
fortuna - luck
mercor - I sell (an awkward choice)
aestas - summer
lex - law
civitas - citizenship (that is, the quality of being a citizen, analogous to
"friendliness" or "redness")

Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Aaron Beckerman
2015-10-30 02:35:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Pasco
gleba - soil
sator - tailor
angelus - angel
fidelis - faithful
donum - gift
fortuna - luck
mercor - I sell (an awkward choice)
aestas - summer
lex - law
civitas - citizenship (that is, the quality of being a citizen, analogous to
"friendliness" or "redness")
Thanks, this is helpful documentation that I should have provided
myself. For "sator", I'd say "founder" and "planter" are more relevant
translations.

Here's how I understand these claim types:

Per gleba: Allocations to Tlon Corporation. I suppose Tlon, like soil,
provides nutrition and incubation for the Urbit project. It also goes
with the planter metaphor.

Per sator: Allocations to the founder, the planter of the seed.

Per angelus: Allocations to angel investors.

Per fidelis: Allocations to loyal early participants.

Per donum: Allocations to donors.

Per fortuna: Allocations to randos. As Adam said, someone named "C. Guy
Yarvin" offered an unstated prize for solving a weird puzzle posted on
his weird blog, "Moron Lab". That prize turned out to be a galaxy.

Per mercor: Galaxies purchased privately before Urbit has launched for real.

Per aestas: Allocations to summer interns.

Per lex: Allocations to legal advisors.

Per civitas: Allocations to the open-source software project.

That last one is interesting; how does the open-source software project
make decisions about its assets? I assume it's BDFL-style at the moment.
But the word "civitas" hints at voting; the Apache Software Foundation
and others have decision processes like this.

Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Mark Justman
2015-10-30 03:39:10 UTC
Permalink
As a non-techie lurker on the dev list. I appreciate more articles on the
High Theory of Urbit

But, speaking for the non-techie urbit-curious (surely in SF there must be
such an orientation!) one thing that is missing from Urbit documentation
and propaganda is a basic statement of what I, as a potential pleb user,
will get out of using Urbit.

Documentation to date has made a good case for the big picture view, but
has only hinted at the future capabilities of a mature Urbit.

This blogger recently asked questions along a similar line, about how Urbit
might work for the plebs who are not tech gearheads:
https://dividuals.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/urbit-and-the-impatience-principle/

*But for it to take it off, it must own the impatience principle.*

*Now of course, it is possible that the principle is already there, just
not so visible yet. If most of the logic is in your planet, then maybe your
computer, your browser, could actually be just a really dumb, cheap generic
thin client? So in theory, a vendor could make pre-configured planets, and
you had to do is to point your e.g. tablet at it? Purchase a tablet,
purchase a card with a scannable barcode URL on taking you to your planet?
Use it immediately, then as you go on, as you gradually learn it, you
slowly take ownership of it and customize it? That could be satisfy the
impatience principle well enough
*

Past theory laid out the Feudle model, and factionally optimized search.
Current propaganda does not bring that concept up to date.

Additionally, I have to wonder if the killer app for Urbit is in the
potential to deliver a killer app for internet advertising. Currently,
internet users try to avoid ads because they are mostly useless, and
Silicon Valley is spending massive sums to try to infer user interests and
demographics from their digital crumbs on the internet. A mature Urbit
seems to have the capability to allow me to put personal demographics and
interests securely into the Urbitsphere, and potentially offer a secure and
anonymized way for marketers and advertisers to deliver highly relevant
ads, discounts, marketing, etc, right to my Urbit interface.
Disintermediating Google and Facebook while improving search and
advertising seems like a big potential selling point for Urbit.

The prior paragraph is just me woolgathering about what a mature Urbit
could do for me. I - and probably many other potential users - would like
to hear more from Curtis and the other Urbit developers about what the end
user experience - down the road - would be, and how it would be superior to
Internet 1.0.

Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
Post by Raymond Pasco
gleba - soil
sator - tailor
angelus - angel
fidelis - faithful
donum - gift
fortuna - luck
mercor - I sell (an awkward choice)
aestas - summer
lex - law
civitas - citizenship (that is, the quality of being a citizen,
analogous to
Post by Raymond Pasco
"friendliness" or "redness")
Thanks, this is helpful documentation that I should have provided
myself. For "sator", I'd say "founder" and "planter" are more relevant
translations.
Per gleba: Allocations to Tlon Corporation. I suppose Tlon, like soil,
provides nutrition and incubation for the Urbit project. It also goes
with the planter metaphor.
Per sator: Allocations to the founder, the planter of the seed.
Per angelus: Allocations to angel investors.
Per fidelis: Allocations to loyal early participants.
Per donum: Allocations to donors.
Per fortuna: Allocations to randos. As Adam said, someone named "C. Guy
Yarvin" offered an unstated prize for solving a weird puzzle posted on
his weird blog, "Moron Lab". That prize turned out to be a galaxy.
Per mercor: Galaxies purchased privately before Urbit has launched for real.
Per aestas: Allocations to summer interns.
Per lex: Allocations to legal advisors.
Per civitas: Allocations to the open-source software project.
That last one is interesting; how does the open-source software project
make decisions about its assets? I assume it's BDFL-style at the moment.
But the word "civitas" hints at voting; the Apache Software Foundation
and others have decision processes like this.
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
James Torre
2015-10-30 13:41:32 UTC
Permalink
potentially offer a secure and anonymized way for marketers and
advertisers to deliver highly relevant ads

Anonymized in what sense? The users have strong pseudonymity, the
advertisers are naming themselves.

(Asked for personal clarification, not to harass any nits.)

--jpt4
As a non-techie lurker on the dev list. I appreciate more articles on the
High Theory of Urbit
But, speaking for the non-techie urbit-curious (surely in SF there must be
such an orientation!) one thing that is missing from Urbit documentation
and propaganda is a basic statement of what I, as a potential pleb user,
will get out of using Urbit.
Documentation to date has made a good case for the big picture view, but
has only hinted at the future capabilities of a mature Urbit.
This blogger recently asked questions along a similar line, about how
https://dividuals.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/urbit-and-the-impatience-principle/
*But for it to take it off, it must own the impatience principle.*
*Now of course, it is possible that the principle is already there, just
not so visible yet. If most of the logic is in your planet, then maybe your
computer, your browser, could actually be just a really dumb, cheap generic
thin client? So in theory, a vendor could make pre-configured planets, and
you had to do is to point your e.g. tablet at it? Purchase a tablet,
purchase a card with a scannable barcode URL on taking you to your planet?
Use it immediately, then as you go on, as you gradually learn it, you
slowly take ownership of it and customize it? That could be satisfy the
impatience principle well enough
*
Past theory laid out the Feudle model, and factionally optimized search.
Current propaganda does not bring that concept up to date.
Additionally, I have to wonder if the killer app for Urbit is in the
potential to deliver a killer app for internet advertising. Currently,
internet users try to avoid ads because they are mostly useless, and
Silicon Valley is spending massive sums to try to infer user interests and
demographics from their digital crumbs on the internet. A mature Urbit
seems to have the capability to allow me to put personal demographics and
interests securely into the Urbitsphere, and potentially offer a secure and
anonymized way for marketers and advertisers to deliver highly relevant
ads, discounts, marketing, etc, right to my Urbit interface.
Disintermediating Google and Facebook while improving search and
advertising seems like a big potential selling point for Urbit.
The prior paragraph is just me woolgathering about what a mature Urbit
could do for me. I - and probably many other potential users - would like
to hear more from Curtis and the other Urbit developers about what the end
user experience - down the road - would be, and how it would be superior to
Internet 1.0.
Mark
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Aaron Beckerman <
Post by Raymond Pasco
Post by Raymond Pasco
gleba - soil
sator - tailor
angelus - angel
fidelis - faithful
donum - gift
fortuna - luck
mercor - I sell (an awkward choice)
aestas - summer
lex - law
civitas - citizenship (that is, the quality of being a citizen,
analogous to
Post by Raymond Pasco
"friendliness" or "redness")
Thanks, this is helpful documentation that I should have provided
myself. For "sator", I'd say "founder" and "planter" are more relevant
translations.
Per gleba: Allocations to Tlon Corporation. I suppose Tlon, like soil,
provides nutrition and incubation for the Urbit project. It also goes
with the planter metaphor.
Per sator: Allocations to the founder, the planter of the seed.
Per angelus: Allocations to angel investors.
Per fidelis: Allocations to loyal early participants.
Per donum: Allocations to donors.
Per fortuna: Allocations to randos. As Adam said, someone named "C. Guy
Yarvin" offered an unstated prize for solving a weird puzzle posted on
his weird blog, "Moron Lab". That prize turned out to be a galaxy.
Per mercor: Galaxies purchased privately before Urbit has launched for real.
Per aestas: Allocations to summer interns.
Per lex: Allocations to legal advisors.
Per civitas: Allocations to the open-source software project.
That last one is interesting; how does the open-source software project
make decisions about its assets? I assume it's BDFL-style at the moment.
But the word "civitas" hints at voting; the Apache Software Foundation
and others have decision processes like this.
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Raymond Pasco
2015-10-30 15:38:28 UTC
Permalink
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.

As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".

With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.

So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.

[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html

Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Mark Justman
2015-10-30 20:19:09 UTC
Permalink
Raymond,

That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.

There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs focus
on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it. Great. But
to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old terminal interface
with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if that is the state of
the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation / propaganda does not clearly
indicate - for average folks - what the big deal is.

Some stupid rhetorical questions some to mind:

- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the
internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a graphical
interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running on a Unix
partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those programs
need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on top of
the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?

Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only bring
them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.

Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?

I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?

I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and control
their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control, they may
be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by more fully
giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a pizza
company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a special
friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who delivers that
ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds rakes some
money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the form of a
micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit gives you
filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,

That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in, and
can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.

Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Galen Wolfe-Pauly
2015-10-31 19:41:07 UTC
Permalink
Mark,

So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit of Urbit for Dummies or, even better, Urbit for the Urbit-Curious. Which is probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the simple stuff, just so we’re clear:

Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things. But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.

Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo. Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a few other utilities.

Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each individual service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from the 70s (Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an individual users. So that brings us to your more important question:

What is the big deal?

Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely. Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that may be a bit of a vague argument.

If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle) that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute. Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring something new to the table?

Privacy

Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal everyone’s actual identity? (Here’s an easy example: http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are purely context-to-context.

Data permanence

Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client, like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should be able to address this message as /~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit that was a more mature piece of software.

Reputation and content quality

With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well. Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many kinds of content.

Modular applications

This is a pretty good rant on this topic: http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit it’s easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook? That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them interoperate with one another.

My own network of devices

Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?

There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so, so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site, certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not (and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its early pioneers and its most naive users.

So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much appreciated — keep it coming!

G
Post by Mark Justman
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no Urbit for Dummies. The existing articles/docs focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it. Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit looks like some sort of old terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation / propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big deal is.
Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some fashion?
Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html), Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control, they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who delivers that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds rakes some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the form of a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit gives you filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in, and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket to Mars.
Mark
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Ross Mohan
2015-11-01 18:28:16 UTC
Permalink
Galen,

Lurker here, lured out beyond resistance by sensing uber-high density
nutrition.

Thanks for the tone and especially content of your response to Mark (and to
Mark as well, for the pointed stick); this was *super* helpful.

Like adding "i" to the real line and getting the complex plane, this layout
of the Urb-vision opens up a glorious new dimension where (a) all the old
stuff is still there, (b) there's a bunch of mystically-cool new stuff, (c)
the new stuff helps explain some of the weird old stuff better and (d)
there's a lot of new work to be done.

Put more simply, I used to think Urb-stuff was Kelvin cool enough simply
because of the architecture and the austere glyph gymnastics; now the
scales have fallen from my eyes and there's a world view to go with it.
Kewl. Thanks to you and the rest of the urb-o-neers for this stuff.

-Ross
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit of *Urbit
for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the Urbit-Curious. *Which is
probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the simple
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer that
lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is under
your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more
robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something new.
Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each individual
service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from the 70s
(Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice
looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is possible.
Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to be built
that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact with a
group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit it’s
easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that
the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software
nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality
independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people
bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need
multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I
can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook?
That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix
philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old
terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if
that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation /
propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the
internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a graphical
interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running on a Unix
partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only bring
them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and control
their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control, they may
be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by more fully
giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a pizza
company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a special
friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who delivers that
ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds rakes some
money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the form of a
micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit gives you
filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in, and
can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
<javascript:>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
tenari
2015-11-02 16:53:58 UTC
Permalink
same. It takes a while to get what Urbit is *for* but when you do, you're
just amazed no one has done it yet.
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Lurker here, lured out beyond resistance by sensing uber-high density
nutrition.
Thanks for the tone and especially content of your response to Mark (and
to Mark as well, for the pointed stick); this was *super* helpful.
Like adding "i" to the real line and getting the complex plane, this
layout of the Urb-vision opens up a glorious new dimension where (a) all
the old stuff is still there, (b) there's a bunch of mystically-cool new
stuff, (c) the new stuff helps explain some of the weird old stuff better
and (d) there's a lot of new work to be done.
Put more simply, I used to think Urb-stuff was Kelvin cool enough simply
because of the architecture and the austere glyph gymnastics; now the
scales have fallen from my eyes and there's a world view to go with it.
Kewl. Thanks to you and the rest of the urb-o-neers for this stuff.
-Ross
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit
of *Urbit for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the Urbit-Curious. *Which
is probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is
under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more
robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something new.
Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each individual
service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from the 70s
(Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice
looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is possible.
Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to be built
that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact with a
group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit it’s
easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that
the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software
nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality
independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people
bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need
multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I
can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook?
That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix
philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old
terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if
that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation /
propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the
internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a
graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running
on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only bring
them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and control
their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control, they may
be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by more fully
giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a pizza
company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a special
friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who delivers that
ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds rakes some
money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the form of a
micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit gives you
filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in,
and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Mark Justman
2015-11-04 14:01:30 UTC
Permalink
Galen,

Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for the
tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are asking
them to imagine some of the implications of a general network computer,
when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first introduction to
the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to enable them to do
that (at least at first, and not without scaling the steep learning curve
of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit together). To get them
quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they need to be spoonfed a
vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them that is grounded in
their current experiences of the internet.

I will illustrate by reworking the use cases you laid out:

*Data permanence. *
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead, web
services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your data. As a
user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you don't
have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians that
they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the night.
If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no guarantees
that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way. Urbit is
designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you control and
custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits you get from
the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit more mature it
will be possible to write a Social Networking application for Urbit (i.e.
an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the photos,
comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their
sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that
constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of
their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along
your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your
moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server).
Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between local
data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant
overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your
social network, and render their updates in your browser organized around a
timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is
possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines
of of all your friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit.
SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU,
every Urbit user has total control over their personal data, and a
fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.

*Modular applications.*
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their userbase,
since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network. Inevitably, a
competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have access to
identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit applications will
have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is designed to make
it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and FUBAR with minimal
effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid out how Urbit
changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point here, where it
is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web services (Twitter,
Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the activity of rendering
in-real time the streams of stored saved videos, photographs, text
comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting that is performed
by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all these services could
be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having to use separate apps
and websites to manage your social media, you - and your data - can stay
within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated back and forth, out
and among the relevant user community. This can enable social media
services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you in control
over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to Ur-Twitter,
Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility of remixing
and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways. Finally, since
you own your data, and you control your Urbit application, there is minimal
risk of you losing access to the web services you have come to depend on.
Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools like Evernote or
Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like Ma.gnolia and Google
Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies that were acquired by
Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there are real risks of
losing access to important internet tools, and potentially losing years of
accumulated information.

*Reputation and content quality. *
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media sites,
but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management of
identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or products -
is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online auctions +
buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality product
reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver Reputation
= Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the software,
jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that jealously guard
their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity for each user,
and provides a foundation for the the creation of *contextualized
reputation*. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary widely
depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars, employees
love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health
department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the
kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet,
and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments
to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these
different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and
structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content.
Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially
be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions
will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated
reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily
categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the
low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests
and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically
opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political
information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.

*Privacy.*
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a
new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit
at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory
to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors can only access the basic billing and account information in
your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to
your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that
occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a
specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your
file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to
your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your
physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them
have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the
process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system.
But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new
capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in
longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to
search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally
identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes
data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to
perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the
possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the
operating system.

*My own network of devices.* (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out of a
sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until
there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human
users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will
vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices going
to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few solutions,
and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset your
Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network
connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of resetting
the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle the
complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human sized’
2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K
children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole
fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data
with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new
applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (
http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic devices
could potentially report their current state through the Urbit identity
network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space." For most
individual users, managing the internet of things is not particularly
compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics companies,
supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their product
inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing need that
will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near future. Urbit
provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity of managing the
massive network demands of the Internet of things, and provides and
infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices of the
Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.

This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok
your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize in
advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications of Urbit.

All best,

Mark
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit of *Urbit
for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the Urbit-Curious. *Which is
probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the simple
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer that
lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is under
your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each individual
service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from the 70s
(Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice
looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to
be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit it’s
easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that
the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software
nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality
independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people
bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need
multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I
can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook?
That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix
philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old
terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if
that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation /
propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the
internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a graphical
interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running on a Unix
partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only bring
them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and control
their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control, they may
be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by more fully
giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a pizza
company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a special
friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who delivers that
ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds rakes some
money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the form of a
micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit gives you
filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in, and
can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Jeremy Wall
2015-11-04 15:06:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for the
tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are asking
them to imagine some of the implications of a general network computer,
when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first introduction to
the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to enable them to do
that (at least at first, and not without scaling the steep learning curve
of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit together). To get them
quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they need to be spoonfed a
vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them that is grounded in
their current experiences of the internet.
*Data permanence. *
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead,
web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your data. As
a user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you
don't have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians
that they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the
night. If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no
guarantees that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way.
Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you
control and custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits
you get from the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit
more mature it will be possible to write a Social Networking application
for Urbit (i.e. an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the
photos, comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their
sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that
constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of
their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along
your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your
moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server).
Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between local
data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant
overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your
social network, and render their updates in your browser organized around a
timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is
possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines
of of all your friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit.
SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU,
every Urbit user has total control over their personal data, and a
fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.
*Modular applications.*
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their userbase,
since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network. Inevitably,
It's important to note that technically speaking nothing prevents someone
from layering their *own* identity and reputation system on top of urbit
and building a new walled garden. Urbit is a general purpose computer after
all. What urbit does though, is make it possible to build a system that
doesn't *naturally* devolve into a walled garden. This may not fit into
your narrative for a tech-savvy but not CompSci savvy user.

a competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have access
Post by Ross Mohan
to identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit applications will
have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is designed to make
it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and FUBAR with minimal
effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid out how Urbit
changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point here, where it
is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web services (Twitter,
Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the activity of rendering
in-real time the streams of stored saved videos, photographs, text
comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting that is performed
by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all these services could
be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having to use separate apps
and websites to manage your social media, you - and your data - can stay
within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated back and forth, out
and among the relevant user community. This can enable social media
services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you in control
over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to Ur-Twitter,
Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility of remixing
and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways. Finally, since
you own your data, and you control your Urbit application, there is minimal
risk of you losing access to the web services you have come to depend on.
Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools like Evernote or
Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like Ma.gnolia and Google
Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies that were acquired by
Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there are real risks of
losing access to important internet tools, and potentially losing years of
accumulated information.
*Reputation and content quality. *
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media sites,
but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management of
identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or products -
is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online auctions +
buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality product
reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver Reputation
= Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the software,
jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that jealously guard
their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity for each user,
and provides a foundation for the the creation of *contextualized
reputation*. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary widely
depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars, employees
love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health
department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the
kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet,
and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments
to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these
different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and
structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content.
Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially
be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions
will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated
reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily
categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the
low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests
and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically
opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political
information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.
*Privacy.*
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a
new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit
at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory
to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors can only access the basic billing and account information in
your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to
your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that
occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a
specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your
file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to
your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your
physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them
have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the
process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system.
But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new
capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in
longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to
search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally
identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes
data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to
perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the
possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the
operating system.
*My own network of devices.* (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out of
a sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until
there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human
users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will
vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices going
to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few solutions,
and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset your
Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network
connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of resetting
the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle the
complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human sized’
2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K
children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole
fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data
with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new
applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (
http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic
devices could potentially report their current state through the Urbit
identity network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space."
For most individual users, managing the internet of things is not
particularly compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics
companies, supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their
product inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing
need that will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near
future. Urbit provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity
of managing the massive network demands of the Internet of things, and
provides and infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices
of the Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok
your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize in
advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit
of *Urbit for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the Urbit-Curious. *Which
is probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is
under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each individual
service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from the 70s
(Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice
looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to
be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit it’s
easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that
the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software
nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality
independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people
bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need
multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I
can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook?
That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix
philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old
terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if
that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation /
propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the
internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a
graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running
on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only bring
them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and control
their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control, they may
be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by more fully
giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a pizza
company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a special
friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who delivers that
ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds rakes some
money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the form of a
micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit gives you
filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in,
and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Jeremy Wall
http://jeremy.marzhillstudios.com
***@marzhillstudios.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Anton Dyudin
2015-11-04 19:12:52 UTC
Permalink
A note on terminology: this essay consistently uses "star" and not "planet"
for the user-sized urbit. To me, "a galaxy with a billion stars" is
actually far more evocative than a star with 65k planets, plus star is a
single syllable etc.; and if there's any internally consistent way to
downshift the official metaphor with cruisers becoming sectors or such, I
would support such a change.

(Alas, they cannot be arms, because the galactic core -> arm metaphor has
already been nabbed by nock)
Post by Jeremy Wall
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for the
tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are asking
them to imagine some of the implications of a general network computer,
when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first introduction to
the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to enable them to do
that (at least at first, and not without scaling the steep learning curve
of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit together). To get them
quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they need to be spoonfed a
vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them that is grounded in
their current experiences of the internet.
*Data permanence. *
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead,
web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your data. As
a user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you
don't have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians
that they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the
night. If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no
guarantees that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way.
Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you
control and custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits
you get from the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit
more mature it will be possible to write a Social Networking application
for Urbit (i.e. an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the
photos, comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their
sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that
constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of
their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along
your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your
moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server).
Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between local
data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant
overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your
social network, and render their updates in your browser organized around a
timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is
possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines
of of all your friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit.
SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU,
every Urbit user has total control over their personal data, and a
fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.
*Modular applications.*
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their userbase,
since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network. Inevitably,
It's important to note that technically speaking nothing prevents someone
from layering their *own* identity and reputation system on top of urbit
and building a new walled garden. Urbit is a general purpose computer after
all. What urbit does though, is make it possible to build a system that
doesn't *naturally* devolve into a walled garden. This may not fit into
your narrative for a tech-savvy but not CompSci savvy user.
a competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have access
Post by Ross Mohan
to identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit applications will
have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is designed to make
it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and FUBAR with minimal
effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid out how Urbit
changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point here, where it
is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web services (Twitter,
Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the activity of rendering
in-real time the streams of stored saved videos, photographs, text
comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting that is performed
by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all these services could
be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having to use separate apps
and websites to manage your social media, you - and your data - can stay
within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated back and forth, out
and among the relevant user community. This can enable social media
services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you in control
over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to Ur-Twitter,
Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility of remixing
and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways. Finally, since
you own your data, and you control your Urbit application, there is minimal
risk of you losing access to the web services you have come to depend on.
Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools like Evernote or
Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like Ma.gnolia and Google
Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies that were acquired by
Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there are real risks of
losing access to important internet tools, and potentially losing years of
accumulated information.
*Reputation and content quality. *
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media
sites, but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management
of identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or
products - is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online
auctions + buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality
product reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver
Reputation = Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the
software, jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that
jealously guard their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity
for each user, and provides a foundation for the the creation of *contextualized
reputation*. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary
widely depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars,
employees love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health
department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the
kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet,
and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments
to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these
different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and
structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content.
Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially
be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions
will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated
reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily
categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the
low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests
and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically
opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political
information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.
*Privacy.*
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a
new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit
at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory
to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors can only access the basic billing and account information in
your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to
your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that
occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a
specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your
file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to
your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your
physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them
have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the
process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system.
But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new
capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in
longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to
search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally
identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes
data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to
perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the
possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the
operating system.
*My own network of devices.* (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out
of a sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until
there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human
users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will
vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices going
to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few solutions,
and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset your
Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network
connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of resetting
the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle the
complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human sized’
2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K
children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole
fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data
with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new
applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (
http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic
devices could potentially report their current state through the Urbit
identity network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space."
For most individual users, managing the internet of things is not
particularly compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics
companies, supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their
product inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing
need that will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near
future. Urbit provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity
of managing the massive network demands of the Internet of things, and
provides and infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices
of the Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok
your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize in
advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit
of *Urbit for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the Urbit-Curious. *Which
is probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is
under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each individual
service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from the 70s
(Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice
looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to
be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit it’s
easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that
the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software
nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality
independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people
bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need
multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I
can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook?
That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix
philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old
terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if
that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation /
propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over
the internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a
graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running
on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only
bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and
control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control,
they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by
more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a
pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a
special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who
delivers that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds
rakes some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the
form of a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit
gives you filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the
privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in,
and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Jeremy Wall
http://jeremy.marzhillstudios.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Mark Justman
2015-11-04 20:42:34 UTC
Permalink
Yeah, I noticed that error about 5 minutes after I hit send. My mental
terminology is still mapped to the nautical naming scheme, and I am still
getting up to speed, alas.

I am shakey how Urbit email would work, but I assume that the email stays
on your server and that your "email" is just the pointer to the appropriate
file on your Urbit. If you could edit that file after the fact, then Urbit
would presumably enable you to "unsend" or amend and resend email, right?

If that is the case, it is another one of those simple examples for users
that fixes an existing pain point and illustrates why the Urbit way is an
improvement.

Mark

Mark
Post by Anton Dyudin
A note on terminology: this essay consistently uses "star" and not
"planet" for the user-sized urbit. To me, "a galaxy with a billion stars"
is actually far more evocative than a star with 65k planets, plus star is a
single syllable etc.; and if there's any internally consistent way to
downshift the official metaphor with cruisers becoming sectors or such, I
would support such a change.
(Alas, they cannot be arms, because the galactic core -> arm metaphor
has already been nabbed by nock)
Post by Jeremy Wall
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for the
tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are asking
them to imagine some of the implications of a general network computer,
when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first introduction to
the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to enable them to do
that (at least at first, and not without scaling the steep learning curve
of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit together). To get them
quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they need to be spoonfed a
vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them that is grounded in
their current experiences of the internet.
*Data permanence. *
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead,
web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your data. As
a user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you
don't have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians
that they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the
night. If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no
guarantees that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way.
Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you
control and custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits
you get from the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit
more mature it will be possible to write a Social Networking application
for Urbit (i.e. an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the
photos, comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their
sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that
constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of
their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along
your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your
moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server).
Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between local
data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant
overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your
social network, and render their updates in your browser organized around a
timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is
possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines
of of all your friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit.
SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU,
every Urbit user has total control over their personal data, and a
fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.
*Modular applications.*
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their
userbase, since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network.
Inevitably,
It's important to note that technically speaking nothing prevents someone
from layering their *own* identity and reputation system on top of urbit
and building a new walled garden. Urbit is a general purpose computer after
all. What urbit does though, is make it possible to build a system that
doesn't *naturally* devolve into a walled garden. This may not fit into
your narrative for a tech-savvy but not CompSci savvy user.
a competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have access
Post by Ross Mohan
to identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit applications will
have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is designed to make
it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and FUBAR with minimal
effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid out how Urbit
changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point here, where it
is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web services (Twitter,
Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the activity of rendering
in-real time the streams of stored saved videos, photographs, text
comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting that is performed
by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all these services could
be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having to use separate apps
and websites to manage your social media, you - and your data - can stay
within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated back and forth, out
and among the relevant user community. This can enable social media
services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you in control
over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to Ur-Twitter,
Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility of remixing
and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways. Finally, since
you own your data, and you control your Urbit application, there is minimal
risk of you losing access to the web services you have come to depend on.
Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools like Evernote or
Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like Ma.gnolia and Google
Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies that were acquired by
Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there are real risks of
losing access to important internet tools, and potentially losing years of
accumulated information.
*Reputation and content quality. *
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media
sites, but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management
of identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or
products - is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online
auctions + buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality
product reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver
Reputation = Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the
software, jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that
jealously guard their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity
for each user, and provides a foundation for the the creation of *contextualized
reputation*. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary
widely depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars,
employees love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health
department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the
kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet,
and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments
to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these
different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and
structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content.
Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially
be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions
will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated
reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily
categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the
low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests
and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically
opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political
information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.
*Privacy.*
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a
new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit
at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory
to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors can only access the basic billing and account information in
your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to
your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that
occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a
specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your
file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to
your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your
physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them
have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the
process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system.
But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new
capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in
longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to
search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally
identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes
data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to
perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the
possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the
operating system.
*My own network of devices.* (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out
of a sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until
there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human
users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will
vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices going
to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few solutions,
and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset your
Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network
connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of resetting
the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle the
complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human sized’
2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K
children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole
fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data
with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new
applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (
http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic
devices could potentially report their current state through the Urbit
identity network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space."
For most individual users, managing the internet of things is not
particularly compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics
companies, supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their
product inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing
need that will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near
future. Urbit provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity
of managing the massive network demands of the Internet of things, and
provides and infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices
of the Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok
your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize in
advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit
of *Urbit for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the Urbit-Curious.
*Which is probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is
under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each
individual service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS
from the 70s (Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving
you a nice looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to
be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit
it’s easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications
that the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system
software nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of
functionality independently to hang on to as many users as possible.
Having people bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I
really need multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing
interface that I can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter
or Facebook? That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the
unix philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old
terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if
that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation /
propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over
the internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a
graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running
on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only
bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and
control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control,
they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by
more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a
pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a
special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who
delivers that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds
rakes some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the
form of a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit
gives you filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the
privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in,
and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Jeremy Wall
http://jeremy.marzhillstudios.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Anton Dyudin
2015-11-04 20:57:45 UTC
Permalink
Stars are totally the metaphor to use though! A ticket is writ to go light
a star in some specific cluster of some specific Galaxy, once there you can
launch whatever planets/moons/sth tied to your Urbit, comets continue to
fly around merrily observing everything. Your star becomes a beacon of
identity that can have communications beamed to it from a galaxy away, a
testament to the will to explore and homestead. /there are
several million of them in a galaxy/
Post by Mark Justman
Yeah, I noticed that error about 5 minutes after I hit send. My mental
terminology is still mapped to the nautical naming scheme, and I am still
getting up to speed, alas.
I am shakey how Urbit email would work, but I assume that the email stays
on your server and that your "email" is just the pointer to the appropriate
file on your Urbit. If you could edit that file after the fact, then Urbit
would presumably enable you to "unsend" or amend and resend email, right?
If that is the case, it is another one of those simple examples for users
that fixes an existing pain point and illustrates why the Urbit way is an
improvement.
Mark
Mark
Post by Anton Dyudin
A note on terminology: this essay consistently uses "star" and not
"planet" for the user-sized urbit. To me, "a galaxy with a billion stars"
is actually far more evocative than a star with 65k planets, plus star is a
single syllable etc.; and if there's any internally consistent way to
downshift the official metaphor with cruisers becoming sectors or such, I
would support such a change.
(Alas, they cannot be arms, because the galactic core -> arm metaphor
has already been nabbed by nock)
Post by Jeremy Wall
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for
the tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are
asking them to imagine some of the implications of a general network
computer, when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first
introduction to the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to
enable them to do that (at least at first, and not without scaling the
steep learning curve of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit
together). To get them quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they
need to be spoonfed a vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them
that is grounded in their current experiences of the internet.
*Data permanence. *
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead,
web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your data. As
a user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you
don't have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians
that they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the
night. If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no
guarantees that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way.
Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you
control and custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits
you get from the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit
more mature it will be possible to write a Social Networking application
for Urbit (i.e. an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the
photos, comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their
sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that
constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of
their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along
your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your
moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server).
Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between local
data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant
overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your
social network, and render their updates in your browser organized around a
timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is
possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines
of of all your friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit.
SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU,
every Urbit user has total control over their personal data, and a
fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.
*Modular applications.*
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their
userbase, since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network.
Inevitably,
It's important to note that technically speaking nothing prevents
someone from layering their *own* identity and reputation system on top of
urbit and building a new walled garden. Urbit is a general purpose computer
after all. What urbit does though, is make it possible to build a system
that doesn't *naturally* devolve into a walled garden. This may not fit
into your narrative for a tech-savvy but not CompSci savvy user.
a competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have
Post by Ross Mohan
access to identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit
applications will have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is
designed to make it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and
FUBAR with minimal effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid
out how Urbit changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point
here, where it is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web
services (Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the
activity of rendering in-real time the streams of stored saved videos,
photographs, text comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting
that is performed by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all
these services could be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having
to use separate apps and websites to manage your social media, you - and
your data - can stay within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated
back and forth, out and among the relevant user community. This can enable
social media services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you
in control over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to
Ur-Twitter, Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility
of remixing and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways.
Finally, since you own your data, and you control your Urbit application,
there is minimal risk of you losing access to the web services you have
come to depend on. Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools
like Evernote or Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like
Ma.gnolia and Google Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies
that were acquired by Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there
are real risks of losing access to important internet tools, and
potentially losing years of accumulated information.
*Reputation and content quality. *
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media
sites, but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management
of identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or
products - is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online
auctions + buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality
product reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver
Reputation = Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the
software, jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that
jealously guard their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity
for each user, and provides a foundation for the the creation of *contextualized
reputation*. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary
widely depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars,
employees love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health
department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the
kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet,
and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments
to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these
different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and
structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content.
Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially
be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions
will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated
reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily
categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the
low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests
and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically
opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political
information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.
*Privacy.*
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a
new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit
at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory
to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors can only access the basic billing and account information in
your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to
your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that
occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a
specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your
file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to
your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your
physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them
have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the
process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system.
But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new
capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in
longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to
search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally
identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes
data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to
perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the
possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the
operating system.
*My own network of devices.* (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out
of a sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until
there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human
users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will
vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices going
to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few solutions,
and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset your
Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network
connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of resetting
the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle the
complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human sized’
2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K
children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole
fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data
with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new
applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (
http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic
devices could potentially report their current state through the Urbit
identity network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space."
For most individual users, managing the internet of things is not
particularly compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics
companies, supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their
product inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing
need that will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near
future. Urbit provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity
of managing the massive network demands of the Internet of things, and
provides and infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices
of the Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok
your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize in
advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a
bit of *Urbit for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the
Urbit-Curious. *Which is probably a community we grossly
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is
under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each
individual service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS
from the 70s (Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving
you a nice looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system
building applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to
be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit
it’s easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications
that the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system
software nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of
functionality independently to hang on to as many users as possible.
Having people bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I
really need multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing
interface that I can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter
or Facebook? That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the
unix philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old
terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if
that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation /
propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over
the internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a
graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running
on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only
bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and
control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control,
they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by
more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a
pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a
special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who
delivers that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds
rakes some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the
form of a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit
gives you filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the
privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in,
and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Jeremy Wall
http://jeremy.marzhillstudios.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Charlie Cummings
2015-11-04 21:21:27 UTC
Permalink
I think we already used up all of our renaming points...
The current address space model doesn't have room for both planets AND
moons under personal servers, either. One would have to be dropped!
Post by Anton Dyudin
Stars are totally the metaphor to use though! A ticket is writ to go light
a star in some specific cluster of some specific Galaxy, once there you can
launch whatever planets/moons/sth tied to your Urbit, comets continue to
fly around merrily observing everything. Your star becomes a beacon of
identity that can have communications beamed to it from a galaxy away, a
testament to the will to explore and homestead. /there are
several million of them in a galaxy/
Post by Mark Justman
Yeah, I noticed that error about 5 minutes after I hit send. My mental
terminology is still mapped to the nautical naming scheme, and I am still
getting up to speed, alas.
I am shakey how Urbit email would work, but I assume that the email stays
on your server and that your "email" is just the pointer to the appropriate
file on your Urbit. If you could edit that file after the fact, then Urbit
would presumably enable you to "unsend" or amend and resend email, right?
If that is the case, it is another one of those simple examples for users
that fixes an existing pain point and illustrates why the Urbit way is an
improvement.
Mark
Mark
Post by Anton Dyudin
A note on terminology: this essay consistently uses "star" and not
"planet" for the user-sized urbit. To me, "a galaxy with a billion stars"
is actually far more evocative than a star with 65k planets, plus star is a
single syllable etc.; and if there's any internally consistent way to
downshift the official metaphor with cruisers becoming sectors or such, I
would support such a change.
(Alas, they cannot be arms, because the galactic core -> arm metaphor
has already been nabbed by nock)
Post by Jeremy Wall
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for
the tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are
asking them to imagine some of the implications of a general network
computer, when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first
introduction to the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to
enable them to do that (at least at first, and not without scaling the
steep learning curve of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit
together). To get them quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they
need to be spoonfed a vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them
that is grounded in their current experiences of the internet.
*Data permanence. *
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data.
Instead, web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your
data. As a user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy,
but you don't have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your
custodians that they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle
of the night. If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have
no guarantees that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful
way. Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data,
giving you control and custody over your data, but still giving you all the
benefits you get from the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit
is a bit more mature it will be possible to write a Social Networking
application for Urbit (i.e. an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook
stores all the photos, comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social
network in their sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the
morning, that constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the
various fields of their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and
organized along your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet,
fire up your moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit
server). Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between
local data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the
relevant overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user
in your social network, and render their updates in your browser organized
around a timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it
is possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the
timelines of of all your friends back to when then they first installed
their Urbit. SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but
with SNAFU, every Urbit user has total control over their personal data,
and a fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.
*Modular applications.*
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their
userbase, since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network.
Inevitably,
It's important to note that technically speaking nothing prevents
someone from layering their *own* identity and reputation system on top of
urbit and building a new walled garden. Urbit is a general purpose computer
after all. What urbit does though, is make it possible to build a system
that doesn't *naturally* devolve into a walled garden. This may not fit
into your narrative for a tech-savvy but not CompSci savvy user.
a competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have
Post by Ross Mohan
access to identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit
applications will have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is
designed to make it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and
FUBAR with minimal effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid
out how Urbit changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point
here, where it is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web
services (Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the
activity of rendering in-real time the streams of stored saved videos,
photographs, text comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting
that is performed by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all
these services could be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having
to use separate apps and websites to manage your social media, you - and
your data - can stay within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated
back and forth, out and among the relevant user community. This can enable
social media services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you
in control over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to
Ur-Twitter, Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility
of remixing and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways.
Finally, since you own your data, and you control your Urbit application,
there is minimal risk of you losing access to the web services you have
come to depend on. Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools
like Evernote or Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like
Ma.gnolia and Google Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies
that were acquired by Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there
are real risks of losing access to important internet tools, and
potentially losing years of accumulated information.
*Reputation and content quality. *
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media
sites, but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management
of identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or
products - is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online
auctions + buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality
product reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver
Reputation = Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the
software, jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that
jealously guard their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity
for each user, and provides a foundation for the the creation of *contextualized
reputation*. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary
widely depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars,
employees love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health
department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the
kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet,
and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments
to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these
different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and
structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content.
Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially
be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions
will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated
reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily
categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the
low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests
and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically
opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political
information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.
*Privacy.*
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a
new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit
at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory
to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors can only access the basic billing and account information in
your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to
your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that
occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a
specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your
file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to
your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your
physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them
have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the
process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system.
But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new
capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in
longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to
search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally
identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes
data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to
perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the
possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the
operating system.
*My own network of devices.* (you nailed this one, so I only tweak
out of a sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time
until there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are
human users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet
will vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices
going to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few
solutions, and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to
reset your Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your
network connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of
resetting the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to
handle the complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the
‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates
for ~64K children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a
whole fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their
data with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new
applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (
http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic
devices could potentially report their current state through the Urbit
identity network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space."
For most individual users, managing the internet of things is not
particularly compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics
companies, supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their
product inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing
need that will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near
future. Urbit provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity
of managing the massive network demands of the Internet of things, and
provides and infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices
of the Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much
grok your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize
in advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a
bit of *Urbit for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the
Urbit-Curious. *Which is probably a community we grossly
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is
under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each
individual service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS
from the 70s (Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving
you a nice looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system
building applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to
be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit
it’s easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications
that the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system
software nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of
functionality independently to hang on to as many users as possible.
Having people bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I
really need multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing
interface that I can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter
or Facebook? That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the
unix philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address
space also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that
means that I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and
data as I see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why
does the IoT always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my
biometric devices were actually just running as a part of the same
networked computer that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network
resources like local resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work
together is baked in from the outset. What about these seeing spaces that
Bret Victor has been talking about? How are all those devices going to
interact with one another? These examples are from the future, but it’s
not technically infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the
functionality of Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can
easily write code on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to
a server in the cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but
isn’t the whole point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if
GitHub were open source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is
much appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing
articles/docs focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to
fix it. Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort
of old terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is
fine, if that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation
/ propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over
the internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a
graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running
on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only
bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What
is Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the
Urbiteers have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing,
but what is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and
the counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and
control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control,
they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by
more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a
pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a
special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who
delivers that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds
rakes some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the
form of a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit
gives you filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the
privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested
in, and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can
become might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that
rocket to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the
aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Jeremy Wall
http://jeremy.marzhillstudios.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Anton Dyudin
2015-11-04 21:26:42 UTC
Permalink
By "sth" I meant "pick one, or 'asteroid', or whatever else fits", yeah.
And sure, I doubt I could make the case for this sufficiently strongly, but
I can dream :P
Post by Charlie Cummings
I think we already used up all of our renaming points...
The current address space model doesn't have room for both planets AND
moons under personal servers, either. One would have to be dropped!
Post by Anton Dyudin
Stars are totally the metaphor to use though! A ticket is writ to go
light a star in some specific cluster of some specific Galaxy, once there
you can launch whatever planets/moons/sth tied to your Urbit, comets
continue to fly around merrily observing everything. Your star becomes a
beacon of identity that can have communications beamed to it from a galaxy
away, a testament to the will to explore and homestead. /there are
several million of them in a galaxy/
Post by Mark Justman
Yeah, I noticed that error about 5 minutes after I hit send. My mental
terminology is still mapped to the nautical naming scheme, and I am still
getting up to speed, alas.
I am shakey how Urbit email would work, but I assume that the email
stays on your server and that your "email" is just the pointer to the
appropriate file on your Urbit. If you could edit that file after the fact,
then Urbit would presumably enable you to "unsend" or amend and resend
email, right?
If that is the case, it is another one of those simple examples for
users that fixes an existing pain point and illustrates why the Urbit way
is an improvement.
Mark
Mark
Post by Anton Dyudin
A note on terminology: this essay consistently uses "star" and not
"planet" for the user-sized urbit. To me, "a galaxy with a billion stars"
is actually far more evocative than a star with 65k planets, plus star is a
single syllable etc.; and if there's any internally consistent way to
downshift the official metaphor with cruisers becoming sectors or such, I
would support such a change.
(Alas, they cannot be arms, because the galactic core -> arm metaphor
has already been nabbed by nock)
Post by Jeremy Wall
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for
the tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are
asking them to imagine some of the implications of a general network
computer, when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first
introduction to the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to
enable them to do that (at least at first, and not without scaling the
steep learning curve of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit
together). To get them quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they
need to be spoonfed a vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them
that is grounded in their current experiences of the internet.
*Data permanence. *
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data.
Instead, web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your
data. As a user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy,
but you don't have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your
custodians that they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle
of the night. If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have
no guarantees that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful
way. Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data,
giving you control and custody over your data, but still giving you all the
benefits you get from the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit
is a bit more mature it will be possible to write a Social Networking
application for Urbit (i.e. an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook
stores all the photos, comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social
network in their sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the
morning, that constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the
various fields of their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and
organized along your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet,
fire up your moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit
server). Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between
local data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the
relevant overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user
in your social network, and render their updates in your browser organized
around a timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it
is possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the
timelines of of all your friends back to when then they first installed
their Urbit. SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but
with SNAFU, every Urbit user has total control over their personal data,
and a fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.
*Modular applications.*
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their
userbase, since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network.
Inevitably,
It's important to note that technically speaking nothing prevents
someone from layering their *own* identity and reputation system on top of
urbit and building a new walled garden. Urbit is a general purpose computer
after all. What urbit does though, is make it possible to build a system
that doesn't *naturally* devolve into a walled garden. This may not fit
into your narrative for a tech-savvy but not CompSci savvy user.
a competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have
Post by Ross Mohan
access to identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit
applications will have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is
designed to make it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and
FUBAR with minimal effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid
out how Urbit changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point
here, where it is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web
services (Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the
activity of rendering in-real time the streams of stored saved videos,
photographs, text comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting
that is performed by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all
these services could be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having
to use separate apps and websites to manage your social media, you - and
your data - can stay within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated
back and forth, out and among the relevant user community. This can enable
social media services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you
in control over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to
Ur-Twitter, Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility
of remixing and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways.
Finally, since you own your data, and you control your Urbit application,
there is minimal risk of you losing access to the web services you have
come to depend on. Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools
like Evernote or Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like
Ma.gnolia and Google Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies
that were acquired by Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there
are real risks of losing access to important internet tools, and
potentially losing years of accumulated information.
*Reputation and content quality. *
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media
sites, but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management
of identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or
products - is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online
auctions + buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality
product reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver
Reputation = Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the
software, jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that
jealously guard their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity
for each user, and provides a foundation for the the creation of *contextualized
reputation*. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary
widely depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars,
employees love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health
department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the
kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet,
and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments
to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these
different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and
structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content.
Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially
be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions
will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated
reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily
categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the
low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests
and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically
opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political
information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.
*Privacy.*
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a
new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit
at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory
to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors can only access the basic billing and account information in
your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to
your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that
occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a
specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your
file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to
your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your
physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them
have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the
process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system.
But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new
capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in
longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to
search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally
identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes
data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to
perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the
possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the
operating system.
*My own network of devices.* (you nailed this one, so I only tweak
out of a sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time
until there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are
human users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet
will vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices
going to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few
solutions, and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to
reset your Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your
network connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of
resetting the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to
handle the complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the
‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates
for ~64K children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a
whole fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their
data with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new
applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (
http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic
devices could potentially report their current state through the Urbit
identity network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space."
For most individual users, managing the internet of things is not
particularly compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics
companies, supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their
product inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing
need that will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near
future. Urbit provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity
of managing the massive network demands of the Internet of things, and
provides and infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices
of the Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much
grok your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize
in advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a
bit of *Urbit for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the
Urbit-Curious. *Which is probably a community we grossly
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a
computer that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs
and is under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers.
The Urbit network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each
individual service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS
from the 70s (Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving
you a nice looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see
that there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow.
Imagine that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system
building applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to
be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your
example about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user
can retain control over the personal details that they share when
interacting with an application. Instead of social networks that are
purely person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that
are purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive?
Why can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is
designed with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the
state of your applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term
implications of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to
ease the pain of interoperating with the web services of today. With a
stateful client, like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can
actually make them work together as they should. In some far future it
means we should be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit
it’s easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications
that the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system
software nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of
functionality independently to hang on to as many users as possible.
Having people bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I
really need multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing
interface that I can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter
or Facebook? That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the
unix philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address
space also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that
means that I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and
data as I see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why
does the IoT always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my
biometric devices were actually just running as a part of the same
networked computer that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network
resources like local resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work
together is baked in from the outset. What about these seeing spaces that
Bret Victor has been talking about? How are all those devices going to
interact with one another? These examples are from the future, but it’s
not technically infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the
functionality of Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can
easily write code on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to
a server in the cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but
isn’t the whole point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if
GitHub were open source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is
much appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing
articles/docs focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to
fix it. Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort
of old terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is
fine, if that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation
/ propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate
over the internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter
and Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in
some fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a
graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running
on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible
to hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only
bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What
is Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the
Urbiteers have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing,
but what is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and
the counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and
control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control,
they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by
more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a
pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a
special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who
delivers that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds
rakes some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the
form of a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit
gives you filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the
privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested
in, and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can
become might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that
rocket to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the
aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Jeremy Wall
http://jeremy.marzhillstudios.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Galen Wolfe-Pauly
2015-11-08 08:46:05 UTC
Permalink
Mark,

This is epic. Thanks for taking the time to put together such a thorough response.

You’re right that I was still too technical. You set the bar in the right spot.

Thanks!
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for the tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are asking them to imagine some of the implications of a general network computer, when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first introduction to the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to enable them to do that (at least at first, and not without scaling the steep learning curve of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit together). To get them quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they need to be spoonfed a vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them that is grounded in their current experiences of the internet.
Data permanence.
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead, web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your data. As a user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you don't have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians that they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the night. If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no guarantees that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way. Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you control and custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits you get from the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit more mature it will be possible to write a Social Networking application for Urbit (i.e. an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the photos, comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server). Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between local data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your social network, and render their updates in your browser organized around a timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines of of all your friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit. SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU, every Urbit user has total control over their personal data, and a fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.
Modular applications.
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their userbase, since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network. Inevitably, a competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have access to identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit applications will have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is designed to make it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and FUBAR with minimal effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid out how Urbit changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point here, where it is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web services (Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the activity of rendering in-real time the streams of stored saved videos, photographs, text comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting that is performed by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all these services could be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having to use separate apps and websites to manage your social media, you - and your data - can stay within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated back and forth, out and among the relevant user community. This can enable social media services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you in control over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to Ur-Twitter, Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility of remixing and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways. Finally, since you own your data, and you control your Urbit application, there is minimal risk of you losing access to the web services you have come to depend on. Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools like Evernote or Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like Ma.gnolia and Google Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies that were acquired by Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there are real risks of losing access to important internet tools, and potentially losing years of accumulated information.
Reputation and content quality.
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media sites, but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management of identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or products - is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online auctions + buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality product reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver Reputation = Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the software, jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that jealously guard their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity for each user, and provides a foundation for the the creation of contextualized reputation. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary widely depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars, employees love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet, and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content. Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber, or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a community tool-lending collective.
Privacy.
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card (talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment processors can only access the basic billing and account information in your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system. But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the operating system.
My own network of devices. (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out of a sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices going to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few solutions, and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset your Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of resetting the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle the complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn <http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn>). All the components of your electronic devices could potentially report their current state through the Urbit identity network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space." For most individual users, managing the internet of things is not particularly compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics companies, supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their product inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing need that will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near future. Urbit provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity of managing the massive network demands of the Internet of things, and provides and infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices of the Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize in advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical implications of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Mark,
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things. But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo. Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a few other utilities.
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely. Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle) that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute. Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal everyone’s actual identity? (Here’s an easy example: http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project <http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project>.) Your example about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client, like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should be able to address this message as /~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well. Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many kinds of content.
Modular applications
This is a pretty good rant on this topic: http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html <http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html>. With an Urbit it’s easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook? That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so, so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site, certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not (and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Post by Mark Justman
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no Urbit for Dummies. The existing articles/docs focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it. Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit looks like some sort of old terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation / propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big deal is.
Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some fashion?
Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html <http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html>), Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control, they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who delivers that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds rakes some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the form of a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit gives you filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in, and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket to Mars.
Mark
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html <https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html>
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Mark Justman
2015-11-09 03:39:24 UTC
Permalink
Galen,

Thanks for the positive feedback. It was an interesting piece to write,
because it helped clarify my understanding of how Future Urbit might work
and be applied.The SNAFU name for the Urbit facebook app was a cute comic
discovery. I also found that the Timeline metaphor was a very nice way to
convey the permanent state logging of Urbit.

One technical question, and this is not just for you, but for the whole
list. How exactly would Urbit interact with the Internet of Things? I
gather that a full Urbit install required a Raspberry Pi level of computing
and IT. So how are sensors, RFID chips, Bluetooth tiles integrated into the
mix? Can their rather Spartan computational abilities easily integrate with
fully functioning Urbit platforms? If so are their any ideas on how that
might work? Feel free to get all wonky about the tech, in this case I am
looking for a techie answer.

Thanks,

Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
This is epic. Thanks for taking the time to put together such a thorough response.
You’re right that I was still too technical. You set the bar in the right spot.
Thanks!
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for the
tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are asking
them to imagine some of the implications of a general network computer,
when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first introduction to
the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to enable them to do
that (at least at first, and not without scaling the steep learning curve
of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit together). To get them
quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they need to be spoonfed a
vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them that is grounded in
their current experiences of the internet.
*Data permanence. *
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead,
web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your data. As
a user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you
don't have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians
that they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the
night. If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no
guarantees that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way.
Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you
control and custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits
you get from the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit
more mature it will be possible to write a Social Networking application
for Urbit (i.e. an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the
photos, comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their
sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that
constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of
their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along
your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your
moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server).
Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between local
data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant
overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your
social network, and render their updates in your browser organized around a
timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is
possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines
of of all your friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit.
SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU,
every Urbit user has total control over their personal data, and a
fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.
*Modular applications.*
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their userbase,
since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network. Inevitably, a
competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have access to
identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit applications will
have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is designed to make
it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and FUBAR with minimal
effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid out how Urbit
changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point here, where it
is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web services (Twitter,
Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the activity of rendering
in-real time the streams of stored saved videos, photographs, text
comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting that is performed
by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all these services could
be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having to use separate apps
and websites to manage your social media, you - and your data - can stay
within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated back and forth, out
and among the relevant user community. This can enable social media
services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you in control
over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to Ur-Twitter,
Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility of remixing
and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways. Finally, since
you own your data, and you control your Urbit application, there is minimal
risk of you losing access to the web services you have come to depend on.
Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools like Evernote or
Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like Ma.gnolia and Google
Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies that were acquired by
Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there are real risks of
losing access to important internet tools, and potentially losing years of
accumulated information.
*Reputation and content quality. *
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media sites,
but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management of
identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or products -
is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online auctions +
buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality product
reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver
Reputation = Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the
software, jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that
jealously guard their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity
for each user, and provides a foundation for the the creation of *contextualized
reputation*. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary widely
depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars, employees
love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health
department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the
kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet,
and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments
to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these
different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and
structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content.
Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially
be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions
will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated
reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily
categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the
low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests
and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically
opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political
information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.
*Privacy.*
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a
new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit
at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory
to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors can only access the basic billing and account information in
your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to
your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that
occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a
specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your
file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to
your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your
physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them
have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the
process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system.
But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new
capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in
longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to
search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally
identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes
data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to
perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the
possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the
operating system.
*My own network of devices.* (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out of
a sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until
there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human
users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will
vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices going
to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few solutions,
and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset your
Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network
connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of resetting
the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle the
complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human sized’
2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K
children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole
fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data
with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new
applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (
http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic
devices could potentially report their current state through the Urbit
identity network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space."
For most individual users, managing the internet of things is not
particularly compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics
companies, supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their
product inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing
need that will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near
future. Urbit provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity
of managing the massive network demands of the Internet of things, and
provides and infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices
of the Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok
your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize in
advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit
of *Urbit for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the Urbit-Curious. *Which
is probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is
under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each individual
service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from the 70s
(Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice
looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to
be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit it’s
easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that
the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software
nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality
independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people
bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need
multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I
can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook?
That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix
philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old
terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if
that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation /
propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the
internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a
graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running
on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only bring
them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and control
their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control, they may
be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by more fully
giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a pizza
company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a special
friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who delivers that
ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds rakes some
money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the form of a
micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit gives you
filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in,
and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Burton Samograd
2015-11-09 16:32:51 UTC
Permalink
I would see that it would fit into the IoT space as an aggregator of data
to your personal server. Each device would not need to be a full Urbit
node, but only accessible via some sort of API (something like SNMP and I'm
sure there are others) and the your node would be used to store the data so
that it is then available to you from then on. Your Urbit would hide the
details of how to collect the data from the devices and only present the
data for you to use in perpetuity. The Urbit would take care of all the
technical details of retrieving the data, you would just consume it after
it had been collected.

Burton
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the positive feedback. It was an interesting piece to write,
because it helped clarify my understanding of how Future Urbit might work
and be applied.The SNAFU name for the Urbit facebook app was a cute comic
discovery. I also found that the Timeline metaphor was a very nice way to
convey the permanent state logging of Urbit.
One technical question, and this is not just for you, but for the whole
list. How exactly would Urbit interact with the Internet of Things? I
gather that a full Urbit install required a Raspberry Pi level of computing
and IT. So how are sensors, RFID chips, Bluetooth tiles integrated into the
mix? Can their rather Spartan computational abilities easily integrate with
fully functioning Urbit platforms? If so are their any ideas on how that
might work? Feel free to get all wonky about the tech, in this case I am
looking for a techie answer.
Thanks,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
This is epic. Thanks for taking the time to put together such a thorough response.
You’re right that I was still too technical. You set the bar in the right spot.
Thanks!
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for the
tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are asking
them to imagine some of the implications of a general network computer,
when in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first introduction to
the concept. They simply don't have a mental model to enable them to do
that (at least at first, and not without scaling the steep learning curve
of figuring out how all the pieces of Urbit fit together). To get them
quickly up to speed on why Urbit is important they need to be spoonfed a
vision of what Urbit will - eventually - do for them that is grounded in
their current experiences of the internet.
*Data permanence. *
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead,
web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your data. As
a user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you
don't have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians
that they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the
night. If you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no
guarantees that you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way.
Urbit is designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you
control and custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits
you get from the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit
more mature it will be possible to write a Social Networking application
for Urbit (i.e. an appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the
photos, comments, likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their
sprawling datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that
constellation of new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of
their vast database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along
your timeline. With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your
moon app(??), which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server).
Since Urbit is a network computer that sees no difference between local
data and network data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant
overnight data updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your
social network, and render their updates in your browser organized around a
timeline. Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is
possible for the SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines
of of all your friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit.
SNAFU and Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU,
every Urbit user has total control over their personal data, and a
fine-grained ability to control who can see that data.
*Modular applications.*
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their userbase,
since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network. Inevitably, a
competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have access to
identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit applications will
have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is designed to make
it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and FUBAR with minimal
effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid out how Urbit
changes software competition, so I won't belabor that point here, where it
is a good point to make}. Today's other social media web services (Twitter,
Pinterest, Instagram, etc.) are all built around the activity of rendering
in-real time the streams of stored saved videos, photographs, text
comments, and actions like pinning, liking, or upvoting that is performed
by the network of participants. Much like SNAFU, all these services could
be re-created on Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having to use separate apps
and websites to manage your social media, you - and your data - can stay
within your Urbit, but then get updated and syndicated back and forth, out
and among the relevant user community. This can enable social media
services and streams to be unified within your Urbit, with you in control
over whether a given image or comment will be shared out to Ur-Twitter,
Ur-Pinterest, or Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility of remixing
and aggregating these media streams in entirely new ways. Finally, since
you own your data, and you control your Urbit application, there is minimal
risk of you losing access to the web services you have come to depend on.
Internet users are increasingly reliant on free tools like Evernote or
Diigo to enhance productivity. Past examples like Ma.gnolia and Google
Reader, and the long list of innovative web companies that were acquired by
Google, and then went offline demonstrate that there are real risks of
losing access to important internet tools, and potentially losing years of
accumulated information.
*Reputation and content quality. *
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media
sites, but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management
of identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or
products - is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online
auctions + buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality
product reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver
Reputation = Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the
software, jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that
jealously guard their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity
for each user, and provides a foundation for the the creation of *contextualized
reputation*. For a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary
widely depending on context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars,
employees love the restaurant because of the pay and management, the health
department thinks the restaurant has too much rat poop in the
kitchen, lenders love the restaurant because of their strong balance sheet,
and suppliers loathe the restaurant because they slow-walk their payments
to vendors. Urbit provides an identity infrastructure enabling all these
different facets to be managed within a stable identity system and
structured data model. Reputation also can be applied to internet content.
Web publications, authors, and even article commenters all can potentially
be assigned a quality reputation by the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions
will vary dramatically between Urbit users, but with an integrated
reputation infrastructure, information on Urbit can be more easily
categorized, structured, and searched in order to filter out the
low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit user's interests
and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might be diametrically
opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of political
information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.
*Privacy.*
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a
new middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit
at /~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory
to the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors can only access the basic billing and account information in
your file. When you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to
your MedRecords folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that
occurs during an exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a
specialist for a consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your
file. When you need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to
your MedRecords folder, and by extension share the results with your
physician. Your medical records belong to you, but the people who need them
have access to them as if they were stored in their own system, and the
process continues to update automatically as you engage the medical system.
But, since Urbit can blend identity and pseudonymity, entirely new
capabilities are possible. You could potentially opt-in to participate in
longitudinal large scale medical studies, where researchers are able to
search across all participating MedRecords directories, with all personally
identifying information stripped out, but preserving the relevant outcomes
data for medical treatments. Such research is currently impossible to
perform today across large groups of patients, but with Urbit, the
possibility for such an initiative has already been baked into the
operating system.
*My own network of devices.* (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out
of a sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until
there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human
users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will
vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices going
to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few solutions,
and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset your
Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network
connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of resetting
the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle the
complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human sized’
2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K
children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole
fleet of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data
with my Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new
applications like the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting (
http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic
devices could potentially report their current state through the Urbit
identity network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space."
For most individual users, managing the internet of things is not
particularly compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics
companies, supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their
product inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing
need that will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near
future. Urbit provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity
of managing the massive network demands of the Internet of things, and
provides and infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices
of the Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok
your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize in
advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit
of *Urbit for Dummies *or, even better, *Urbit for the Urbit-Curious. *Which
is probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is
under your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably
well and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and
talking to other web services using APIs among other fairly simple things.
But, as you say, Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them
out of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build
a new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new. Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each individual
service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from the 70s
(Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice
looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like
a tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web
is incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine, instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing
things? Our laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do
many different things than our collection of web services. By powerful I
mean that the individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of
their own, that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a
creative tool. In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing
solution that can live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are
enormously important to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that
may be a bit of a vague argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a
few good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them, but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications (hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle)
that we will develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute.
Urbit is 100% open source, including the high level apps that we ship with
it. Although it’s possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So
anyway, what do we see as areas where Urbit applications can bring
something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible. Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to
be built that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person, perhaps instead we could build relationships that are
purely context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications
of this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client,
like Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work together as they should. In some far future it means we should
be able to address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29 and get the exact state
of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were typing it into an Urbit
that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in
to the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority. This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it
comes to relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it
isn’t directly incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could
reliably attribute content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle
that created content with structured data, and leave it to the user to
decide what parts of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at
all. Let’s say I want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku
earthquake and tsunami. Not news articles, not secondary sources — but
individual experiences. Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with
attribution. No problem, pseudomyity works really well for something like
this. The semantic web is a great idea, but without a strong identity
solution that structured data is useless. For search to really get us to
what we want we need a combination of an identity solution and a structured
data model. Reputation extends itself into a lot of other areas as well.
Do you really trust Yelp reviews? Solving reputation in a decentralized
way gives us the ability to trust and build meaningfully on top of many
kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit it’s
easy to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that
the user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software
nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality
independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people
bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need
multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I
can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook?
That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix
philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not
(and cannot, by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit
is an open ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its
early pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it
makes Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is
way over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical users and early adopters.
There currently is no *Urbit for Dummies*. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great. But to the uninitiated, Urbit *looks *like some sort of old
terminal interface with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if
that is the state of the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation /
propaganda does not clearly indicate - for average folks - what the big
deal is.
- Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over
the internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
- Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a
graphical interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running
on a Unix partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
- Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those
programs need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on
top of the underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
- Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking, DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only
bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this (
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and
control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control,
they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by
more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a
pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a
special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who
delivers that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds
rakes some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the
form of a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit
gives you filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the
privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in,
and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Curtis Yarvin
2015-11-09 19:02:10 UTC
Permalink
Yeah, I'd say the same thing in perhaps a slightly less geeky way.

Basically, in our present imperfect world when you buy an Internet
Thing, it's hardcoded to talk to a server controlled by the
manufacturer. Your Nest talks to Google, etc. In the future perfect
world, your Thing will talk to your own server and thus be an
extension of you, rather than an extension of Google. Again, the
intermediate step before this utopia is that the Google server has an
API which your own urbit can use to pull down dataz.

It's possible for an urbit-friendly Thing to contain a full urbit
moon/comet, but it's certainly not necessary. Probably now your
average thing uses HTTP, which is fine. Alternatively, you don't
actually have to be running an urbit to send Urbit protocol messages.

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Burton Samograd
I would see that it would fit into the IoT space as an aggregator of data to
your personal server. Each device would not need to be a full Urbit node,
but only accessible via some sort of API (something like SNMP and I'm sure
there are others) and the your node would be used to store the data so that
it is then available to you from then on. Your Urbit would hide the details
of how to collect the data from the devices and only present the data for
you to use in perpetuity. The Urbit would take care of all the technical
details of retrieving the data, you would just consume it after it had been
collected.
Burton
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the positive feedback. It was an interesting piece to write,
because it helped clarify my understanding of how Future Urbit might work
and be applied.The SNAFU name for the Urbit facebook app was a cute comic
discovery. I also found that the Timeline metaphor was a very nice way to
convey the permanent state logging of Urbit.
One technical question, and this is not just for you, but for the whole
list. How exactly would Urbit interact with the Internet of Things? I gather
that a full Urbit install required a Raspberry Pi level of computing and IT.
So how are sensors, RFID chips, Bluetooth tiles integrated into the mix? Can
their rather Spartan computational abilities easily integrate with fully
functioning Urbit platforms? If so are their any ideas on how that might
work? Feel free to get all wonky about the tech, in this case I am looking
for a techie answer.
Thanks,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
This is epic. Thanks for taking the time to put together such a thorough response.
You’re right that I was still too technical. You set the bar in the
right spot.
Thanks!
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for the
tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are asking
them to imagine some of the implications of a general network computer, when
in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first introduction to the
concept. They simply don't have a mental model to enable them to do that (at
least at first, and not without scaling the steep learning curve of figuring
out how all the pieces of Urbit fit together). To get them quickly up to
speed on why Urbit is important they need to be spoonfed a vision of what
Urbit will - eventually - do for them that is grounded in their current
experiences of the internet.
Data permanence.
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead,
web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your data. As a
user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you don't
have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians that
they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the night. If
you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no guarantees that
you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way. Urbit is
designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you control and
custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits you get from
the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit more mature it
will be possible to write a Social Networking application for Urbit (i.e. an
appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the photos, comments,
likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their sprawling
datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that constellation of
new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of their vast
database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along your timeline.
With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your moon app(??),
which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server). Since Urbit is a
network computer that sees no difference between local data and network
data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant overnight data
updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your social network,
and render their updates in your browser organized around a timeline.
Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is possible for the
SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines of of all your
friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit. SNAFU and
Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU, every Urbit
user has total control over their personal data, and a fine-grained ability
to control who can see that data.
Modular applications.
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their userbase,
since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network. Inevitably, a
competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have access to
identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit applications will
have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is designed to make
it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and FUBAR with minimal
effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid out how Urbit changes
software competition, so I won't belabor that point here, where it is a good
point to make}. Today's other social media web services (Twitter, Pinterest,
Instagram, etc.) are all built around the activity of rendering in-real time
the streams of stored saved videos, photographs, text comments, and actions
like pinning, liking, or upvoting that is performed by the network of
participants. Much like SNAFU, all these services could be re-created on
Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having to use separate apps and websites to
manage your social media, you - and your data - can stay within your Urbit,
but then get updated and syndicated back and forth, out and among the
relevant user community. This can enable social media services and streams
to be unified within your Urbit, with you in control over whether a given
image or comment will be shared out to Ur-Twitter, Ur-Pinterest, or
Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility of remixing and aggregating
these media streams in entirely new ways. Finally, since you own your data,
and you control your Urbit application, there is minimal risk of you losing
access to the web services you have come to depend on. Internet users are
increasingly reliant on free tools like Evernote or Diigo to enhance
productivity. Past examples like Ma.gnolia and Google Reader, and the long
list of innovative web companies that were acquired by Google, and then went
offline demonstrate that there are real risks of losing access to important
internet tools, and potentially losing years of accumulated information.
Reputation and content quality.
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media
sites, but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the management
of identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or products
- is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online auctions +
buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality product
reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver Reputation
= Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the software,
jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that jealously guard
their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity for each user, and
provides a foundation for the the creation of contextualized reputation. For
a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary widely depending on
context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars, employees love the
restaurant because of the pay and management, the health department thinks
the restaurant has too much rat poop in the kitchen, lenders love the
restaurant because of their strong balance sheet, and suppliers loathe the
restaurant because they slow-walk their payments to vendors. Urbit provides
an identity infrastructure enabling all these different facets to be managed
within a stable identity system and structured data model. Reputation also
can be applied to internet content. Web publications, authors, and even
article commenters all can potentially be assigned a quality reputation by
the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions will vary dramatically between Urbit
users, but with an integrated reputation infrastructure, information on
Urbit can be more easily categorized, structured, and searched in order to
filter out the low-quality information that is unrelated to a given Urbit
user's interests and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert might
be diametrically opposed in the perspectives that define a quality source of
political information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use their
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users to
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally, it
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure and
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able to
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next Uber,
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements of a
community tool-lending collective.
Privacy.
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for authenticating who
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure all
your information as it transits across the internet until it is rendered in
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the boundaries
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of a new
middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical records
are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit at
/~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your primary
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords directory to
the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment processors
can only access the basic billing and account information in your file. When
you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to your MedRecords
folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that occurs during an
exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a specialist for a
consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your file. When you
need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to your MedRecords
folder, and by extension share the results with your physician. Your medical
records belong to you, but the people who need them have access to them as
if they were stored in their own system, and the process continues to update
automatically as you engage the medical system. But, since Urbit can blend
identity and pseudonymity, entirely new capabilities are possible. You could
potentially opt-in to participate in longitudinal large scale medical
studies, where researchers are able to search across all participating
MedRecords directories, with all personally identifying information stripped
out, but preserving the relevant outcomes data for medical treatments. Such
research is currently impossible to perform today across large groups of
patients, but with Urbit, the possibility for such an initiative has already
been baked into the operating system.
My own network of devices. (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out of a
sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until
there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human
users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will
vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices going
to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few solutions,
and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset your
Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network
connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of resetting
the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle the
complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human sized’
2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K
children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole fleet
of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data with my
Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new applications like
the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting
(http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic devices
could potentially report their current state through the Urbit identity
network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space." For most
individual users, managing the internet of things is not particularly
compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics companies,
supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their product
inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing need that
will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near future. Urbit
provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity of managing the
massive network demands of the Internet of things, and provides and
infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices of the
Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok
your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize in
advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical implications
of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a bit
of Urbit for Dummies or, even better, Urbit for the Urbit-Curious. Which is
probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the simple
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and is under
your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works reasonably well
and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo and
building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static content to
the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and talking to other
web services using APIs among other fairly simple things. But, as you say,
Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get them out
of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We build a
new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something new.
Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment, Arvo.
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver, and a
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each individual
service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from the 70s
(Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice
looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we could
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No need
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet where
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less like a
tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern web is
incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely. Imagine,
instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a single
repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never had to
struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a service
disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing things? Our
laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do many different
things than our collection of web services. By powerful I mean that the
individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of their own,
that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a creative tool.
In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing solution that can
live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are enormously important
to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that may be a bit of a vague
argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow. Imagine
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch on a few
good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of them,
but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our approach is
very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some applications
(hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle) that we will
develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute. Urbit is 100% open
source, including the high level apps that we ship with it. Although it’s
possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So anyway, what do we see
as areas where Urbit applications can bring something new to the table?
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system building
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is possible.
Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to be built
that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact with a
group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example about
advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can retain
control over the personal details that they share when interacting with an
application. Instead of social networks that are purely person-to-person,
perhaps instead we could build relationships that are purely
context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is designed
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state of your
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term implications of
this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain of
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful client, like
Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make them work
together as they should. In some far future it means we should be able to
address this message as /~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29
and get the exact state of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I were
typing it into an Urbit that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation built in to
the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside authority.
This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it comes to
relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it isn’t directly
incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could reliably attribute
content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle that created
content with structured data, and leave it to the user to decide what parts
of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at all. Let’s say I
want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku earthquake and tsunami.
Not news articles, not secondary sources — but individual experiences.
Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with attribution. No problem,
pseudomyity works really well for something like this. The semantic web is
a great idea, but without a strong identity solution that structured data is
useless. For search to really get us to what we want we need a combination
of an identity solution and a structured data model. Reputation extends
itself into a lot of other areas as well. Do you really trust Yelp reviews?
Solving reputation in a decentralized way gives us the ability to trust and
build meaningfully on top of many kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit it’s easy
to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that the
user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software
nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of functionality
independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people
bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really need
multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface that I
can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook?
That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix
philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that means that
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data as I
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does the IoT
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked computer
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in from
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the functionality of
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write code
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in the
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the whole
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub were open
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been lost
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is still so,
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction site,
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to that
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking, how can
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At present
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to participate
in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not (and cannot,
by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit is an open
ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its early
pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy" it makes
Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For an
average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it is way
over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more technical
users and early adopters.
There currently is no Urbit for Dummies. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it. Great.
But to the uninitiated, Urbit looks like some sort of old terminal interface
with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if that is the state of
the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation / propaganda does not clearly
indicate - for average folks - what the big deal is.
Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the
internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly in some
fashion?
Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a graphical
interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running on a Unix
partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those programs
need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on top of the
underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to hacking,
DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only
bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the Urbiteers
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but what
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this
(http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html),
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That is a
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and
control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their control,
they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate by
more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it worth to a
pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a
special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who delivers
that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds rakes
some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the form of
a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit gives you
filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in,
and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can become
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that rocket
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a digital
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet now.0,
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the aforementioned
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer and be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account. Bruce
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk of
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the land" -
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you pay
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt, you're a
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly not
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom closet,
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts" that
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives the full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from the
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Mark Justman
2015-11-10 16:26:25 UTC
Permalink
Thanks for the insights into Urbit and the IOT.

It enabled me to do a bit of sleuthing and answer my own question.

For things like passive RFID tags, it seems that most of the networking
requirements can be integrated into the RFID reader devices.

From a very short whitepaper:
https://www.iab.org/wp-content/IAB-uploads/2011/03/Schmidt.pdf
*In this concept paper we describe a method to integrate passive RFID
technology into the Internet of Things. We expect that this approach can be
an enabling technology for many new applications with RFID tags. For our
approach we apply concepts from MIPv6. The tags do not require IPv6
functionality themselves, but communicate with readers using their standard
RFID communication protocol. The readers provide MIPv6 functionality and
act as gateway between the Internet and the tags. Most additional overhead
for the required operations accumulates on the reader side, as typical RFID
readers provide enough computational power to implement such additional
functionality. We shortly discuss the concept of security suites for the
remote RFID communication to set up a secure communication. We can conclude
that MIPv6 allows to fully integrate passive RFID tags into the IoT in a
transparent and compatible way, while the question of a secure connection
is still under research.*
Post by Curtis Yarvin
Yeah, I'd say the same thing in perhaps a slightly less geeky way.
Basically, in our present imperfect world when you buy an Internet
Thing, it's hardcoded to talk to a server controlled by the
manufacturer. Your Nest talks to Google, etc. In the future perfect
world, your Thing will talk to your own server and thus be an
extension of you, rather than an extension of Google. Again, the
intermediate step before this utopia is that the Google server has an
API which your own urbit can use to pull down dataz.
It's possible for an urbit-friendly Thing to contain a full urbit
moon/comet, but it's certainly not necessary. Probably now your
average thing uses HTTP, which is fine. Alternatively, you don't
actually have to be running an urbit to send Urbit protocol messages.
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Burton Samograd
Post by Burton Samograd
I would see that it would fit into the IoT space as an aggregator of
data to
Post by Burton Samograd
your personal server. Each device would not need to be a full Urbit
node,
Post by Burton Samograd
but only accessible via some sort of API (something like SNMP and I'm
sure
Post by Burton Samograd
there are others) and the your node would be used to store the data so
that
Post by Burton Samograd
it is then available to you from then on. Your Urbit would hide the
details
Post by Burton Samograd
of how to collect the data from the devices and only present the data for
you to use in perpetuity. The Urbit would take care of all the technical
details of retrieving the data, you would just consume it after it had
been
Post by Burton Samograd
collected.
Burton
Post by Ross Mohan
Galen,
Thanks for the positive feedback. It was an interesting piece to write,
because it helped clarify my understanding of how Future Urbit might
work
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
and be applied.The SNAFU name for the Urbit facebook app was a cute
comic
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
discovery. I also found that the Timeline metaphor was a very nice way
to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
convey the permanent state logging of Urbit.
One technical question, and this is not just for you, but for the whole
list. How exactly would Urbit interact with the Internet of Things? I
gather
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
that a full Urbit install required a Raspberry Pi level of computing
and IT.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
So how are sensors, RFID chips, Bluetooth tiles integrated into the
mix? Can
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
their rather Spartan computational abilities easily integrate with fully
functioning Urbit platforms? If so are their any ideas on how that might
work? Feel free to get all wonky about the tech, in this case I am
looking
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
for a techie answer.
Thanks,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
This is epic. Thanks for taking the time to put together such a
thorough
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
response.
You’re right that I was still too technical. You set the bar in the
right spot.
Thanks!
Galen,
Thanks for the very thoughtful reply to my comments. The problem for
the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
tech-savvy (but not CompSci savvy) Urbit uninitiated is that you are
asking
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
them to imagine some of the implications of a general network
computer, when
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
in all likelihood, encountering Urbit is their first introduction to
the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
concept. They simply don't have a mental model to enable them to do
that (at
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
least at first, and not without scaling the steep learning curve of
figuring
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
out how all the pieces of Urbit fit together). To get them quickly up
to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
speed on why Urbit is important they need to be spoonfed a vision of
what
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Urbit will - eventually - do for them that is grounded in their current
experiences of the internet.
Data permanence.
Currently, internet users do not control or manage their data. Instead,
web services like Facebook host and act as the custodians of your
data. As a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
user, you are given a very permissive data-visitation policy, but you
don't
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
have actual custody. You only have the assurance of your custodians
that
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
they are not doing creepy things to your data in the middle of the
night. If
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
you want to check your data out of the facility, you have no
guarantees that
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
you will be able to get back your data in a meaningful way. Urbit is
designed with the intention of storing your data, giving you control
and
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
custody over your data, but still giving you all the benefits you get
from
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the web services you have grown used to. When Urbit is a bit more
mature it
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
will be possible to write a Social Networking application for Urbit
(i.e. an
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
appliance called SNAFU). Today, Facebook stores all the photos,
comments,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
likes, cat gifs from you and your social network in their sprawling
datacenters. When you check Facebook in the morning, that
constellation of
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
new overnight data is extracted from the various fields of their vast
database, and assembled in your browser, and organized along your
timeline.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
With SNAFU, you will go over to your tablet, fire up your moon app(??),
which is pointed at your star (your cloud Urbit server). Since Urbit
is a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
network computer that sees no difference between local data and network
data, your SNAFU appliance is able to extract the relevant overnight
data
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
updates from the constellation of every Urbit user in your social
network,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
and render their updates in your browser organized around a timeline.
Because every Urbit stores all user data permanently, it is possible
for the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
SNAFU app to look back in your timeline, and the timelines of of all
your
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
friends back to when then they first installed their Urbit. SNAFU and
Facebook can deliver similar user experiences, but with SNAFU, every
Urbit
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
user has total control over their personal data, and a fine-grained
ability
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
to control who can see that data.
Modular applications.
Importantly, the designers of SNAFU don't get to become the next
Zuckerberg. SNAFU can't maintain a walled garden around their
userbase,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
since Urbit is designed around a robust identity network. Inevitably, a
competitor like FUBAR will emerge but since FUBAR and SNAFU have
access to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
identical user-bases (i.e. all Urbit users), the Urbit applications
will
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
have to compete on functionality or ease of use. Urbit is designed to
make
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
it trivial to migrate between appliances like SNAFU and FUBAR with
minimal
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
effort and no data loss. {the white paper already laid out how Urbit
changes
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
software competition, so I won't belabor that point here, where it is
a good
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
point to make}. Today's other social media web services (Twitter,
Pinterest,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Instagram, etc.) are all built around the activity of rendering
in-real time
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the streams of stored saved videos, photographs, text comments, and
actions
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
like pinning, liking, or upvoting that is performed by the network of
participants. Much like SNAFU, all these services could be re-created
on
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Urbit. With Urbit, instead of having to use separate apps and websites
to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
manage your social media, you - and your data - can stay within your
Urbit,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
but then get updated and syndicated back and forth, out and among the
relevant user community. This can enable social media services and
streams
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
to be unified within your Urbit, with you in control over whether a
given
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
image or comment will be shared out to Ur-Twitter, Ur-Pinterest, or
Ur-Instagram. It also offers a new possibility of remixing and
aggregating
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
these media streams in entirely new ways. Finally, since you own your
data,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
and you control your Urbit application, there is minimal risk of you
losing
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
access to the web services you have come to depend on. Internet users
are
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
increasingly reliant on free tools like Evernote or Diigo to enhance
productivity. Past examples like Ma.gnolia and Google Reader, and the
long
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
list of innovative web companies that were acquired by Google, and
then went
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
offline demonstrate that there are real risks of losing access to
important
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
internet tools, and potentially losing years of accumulated
information.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Reputation and content quality.
The internet has not only balkanized the interfaces of social media
sites, but it has allowed a handful of websites to dominate the
management
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
of identity and reputation. Reputation - for sellers, providers, or
products
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
- is a killer app that has helped fuel Internet empires. Online
auctions +
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
buyer/seller reputation = E-Bay. World class logistics + quality
product
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
reviews = Amazon.com. Private vehicles + Smartphone App + Driver
Reputation
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
= Uber. Urbit has identity and reputation hardwired into the software,
jailbreaking reputation and identity from the services that jealously
guard
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
their reputation systems. Urbit creates a unique identity for each
user, and
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
provides a foundation for the the creation of contextualized
reputation. For
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
a given Urbit identity, the reputation might vary widely depending on
context. Ur-Yelp might give a restaurant 3 stars, employees love the
restaurant because of the pay and management, the health department
thinks
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the restaurant has too much rat poop in the kitchen, lenders love the
restaurant because of their strong balance sheet, and suppliers loathe
the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
restaurant because they slow-walk their payments to vendors. Urbit
provides
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
an identity infrastructure enabling all these different facets to be
managed
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
within a stable identity system and structured data model. Reputation
also
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
can be applied to internet content. Web publications, authors, and even
article commenters all can potentially be assigned a quality
reputation by
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the Urbit userbase. Of course, opinions will vary dramatically between
Urbit
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
users, but with an integrated reputation infrastructure, information on
Urbit can be more easily categorized, structured, and searched in
order to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
filter out the low-quality information that is unrelated to a given
Urbit
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
user's interests and needs. Democratic Dorothy and Republican Robert
might
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
be diametrically opposed in the perspectives that define a quality
source of
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
political information, but Urbit's reputation infrastructure can use
their
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
quality assessments, and the quality assessments of like-minded users
to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
generate personalized recommendations that both find useful. Finally,
it
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
should be noted that Urbit only provides the identify infrastructure
and
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
data formats. The users and developers of Urbit applications are able
to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
scale those tools up to supporting the reputational needs of the next
Uber,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
or get scaled down to support the more modest reputation requirements
of a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
community tool-lending collective.
Privacy.
Current users of the internet don't have any, which has been made
especially clear after the Snowden revelations. Urbit keeps all of your
information encrypted on your star, has strong tools for
authenticating who
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
can access your information, and uses encrypted connections to secure
all
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
your information as it transits across the internet until it is
rendered in
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
a user screen. Urbit doesn't just offer privacy, it can blur the
boundaries
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
between pure privacy and open transparency by enabling the creation of
a new
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
middle ground of verified pseudonymity. To illustrate, consider how a
healthcare provider could use Urbit to transform how patient medical
records
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
are handled. Your Urbit ID is written on your health insurance card
(talsur-todres). Your electronic medical records are kept inside your
personal Urbit, and the records are on the your Urbit at
/~talsur-todres/personal/MedRecords. When you checked in at your
primary
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
physician the first time, you enabled access to your MedRecords
directory to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the doctors and nurses in the practice. Secretaries and payment
processors
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
can only access the basic billing and account information in your
file. When
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
you go in for a checkup, the medical professionals point to your
MedRecords
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
folder and record all of the annoying box-checking that occurs during
an
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
exam, bringing your file up to date. When you go to a specialist for a
consult, their annoying box-checking gets recorded in your file. When
you
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
need lab tests, the lab is able to upload the results to your
MedRecords
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
folder, and by extension share the results with your physician. Your
medical
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
records belong to you, but the people who need them have access to
them as
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
if they were stored in their own system, and the process continues to
update
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
automatically as you engage the medical system. But, since Urbit can
blend
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
identity and pseudonymity, entirely new capabilities are possible. You
could
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
potentially opt-in to participate in longitudinal large scale medical
studies, where researchers are able to search across all participating
MedRecords directories, with all personally identifying information
stripped
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
out, but preserving the relevant outcomes data for medical treatments.
Such
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
research is currently impossible to perform today across large groups
of
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
patients, but with Urbit, the possibility for such an initiative has
already
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
been baked into the operating system.
My own network of devices. (you nailed this one, so I only tweak out
of a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
sense of completeness)
The Internet of Things of coming, and it is only a matter of time until
there are more sensors and devices on the internet than there are human
users. In 20 years, the number of digital devices on the internet will
vastly outnumber the number of human users. How are all these devices
going
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
to managed securely and easily? The current internet offers few
solutions,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
and the potential for compounding problems. Today you need to reset
your
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Nest thermostat, but tomorrow you will need to re-pair your network
connected light fixtures, and eventually you face the prospect of
resetting
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the password on your refrigerator. Urbit has been designed to handle
the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
complexity of a mature internet of things. Each Urbit at the ‘human
sized’
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
2^32 tier of the address space also signs the certificates for ~64K
children. In practice that means that I can manage and secure a whole
fleet
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
of Urbit-enabled devices that are able to sync and share their data
with my
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Urbit as I see fit. Urbit could also enable entirely new applications
like
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the "seeing spaces" that Bret Victor is promoting
(http://tinyurl.com/o8m57wn). All the components of your electronic
devices
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
could potentially report their current state through the Urbit identity
network, and get projected onto the walls of your "seeing space." For
most
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
individual users, managing the internet of things is not particularly
compelling (yet). However, for warehouse managers, logistics companies,
supply chain integrators, and retailers who need to manage their
product
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
inventory, easily managing the Internet of Things is a pressing need
that
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
will likely explode into a massive IT headache in the near future.
Urbit
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
provides a robust identity system to harness the complexity of
managing the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
massive network demands of the Internet of things, and provides and
infrastructure to bridge the needs of the sensors and devices of the
Internet of Things, with the real human users on the Urbit network.
This is Urbit spoonfed to the Urbit-curious. I think I pretty much grok
your tech, within the limits of my liberal arts education. I apologize
in
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
advance where I have botched my interpretation of the technical
implications
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
of Urbit.
All best,
Mark
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Mark,
So great! Let’s see if I can contribute (off the top of my head) a
bit
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
of Urbit for Dummies or, even better, Urbit for the Urbit-Curious.
Which is
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
probably a community we grossly underestimate. Let’s start with the
simple
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Urbit is designed to be a general-purpose personal server: a computer
that lives on the network, stores your data, runs your programs and
is under
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
your control. Urbit is also the network of these servers. The Urbit
network is finite and semi-decentralized, so each Urbit is owned
cryptographically as if it were property. Today Urbit works
reasonably well
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
and is pretty stable for anyone who’s comfortable cloning a Git repo
and
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
building from source. Urbit 2015 does well at publishing static
content to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the web, chatting with other Urbit users, sharing code and talking to
other
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
web services using APIs among other fairly simple things. But, as
you say,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Urbit is designed to grow into something much more robust.
Even for a savvy semi-technical person it’s not too difficult to
understand the technical outlines of what we’re doing, so let’s get
them out
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
of the way. Urbit works to treat the cloud (or any unix box with an
internet connection) like the internet treated the phone system. We
build a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
new layer on top, treating the cloud as infrastructure for something
new.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Urbit is built out of three parts: a simple combinator VM, Nock; a
functional programming language, Hoon; and an operating environment,
Arvo.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Arvo includes networking, identity, global revisioned file storage, an
application model, a build system, a web server, a terminal driver,
and a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
few other utilities.
Since most of the modern internet runs on Unix machines, each
individual
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
service has to bridge the gap between the combination of an OS from
the 70s
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
(Unix) and a network from the 80s (the internet) to serving you a nice
looking webpage for you to interact with. Doing this involves
re-implementing some collection or ‘stack’ of the services that Urbit
combines into a single operating environment — and this is where we
could
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
spend a lot of time complaining about how the internet is broken. No
need
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
to go on about that. Our point is simple: we have built an internet
where
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
each app serves N users because Unix just isn’t designed to serve an
What is the big deal?
Most broadly, that we might actually be able to give general-purpose
computing back to individual users. The computer feels less and less
like a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
tool as we have made the move to doing everything online. The modern
web is
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
incredibly convenient, but because most services are not easily
interoperable there’s very little unexpected output today’s users can
generate. Users are prescribed their experiences almost entirely.
Imagine,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
instead, that all of the web services you used simply accessed a
single
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
repository of data. You never used more than one login, you never
had to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
struggle to move data between services. You never worried about a
service
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
disappearing. Would we ever invent the present way of doing things?
Our
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
laptops remain more powerful in terms of their ability to do many
different
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
things than our collection of web services. By powerful I mean that
the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
individual can actually produce new and unexpected results of their
own,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
that they can exercise *their* power over the machine as a creative
tool.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
In our view, we ought to have a general-purpose computing solution
that can
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
live permanently on the network. Open-ended tools are enormously
important
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
to building and shaping ideas. But, I concede, that may be a bit of
a vague
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
argument.
If you’re even slightly compelled by the above, then you can see that
there are a whole laundry list of smaller deals that can follow.
Imagine
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
that we all owned a general-purpose computer in the cloud that was
universally available, what would we want to do with it? You touch
on a few
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
good points in your previous messages. We have thought about many of
them,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
but there are many that are yet to be explored. In general our
approach is
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
very deliberately *platform first*. There are surely some
applications
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
(hopefully some that can satisfy the impatience principle) that we
will
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
develop, and hopefully many that others will contribute. Urbit is
100% open
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
source, including the high level apps that we ship with it. Although
it’s
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
possible, in theory, to ship compiled nock code. So anyway, what do
we see
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
as areas where Urbit applications can bring something new to the
table?
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Privacy
Because identity is such a basic primitive of the Urbit system
building
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
applications that deal with privacy in new and unexpected ways is
possible.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Verified pseudonymity is an interesting area for applications to be
built
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
that is difficult with the current architecture. Want to interact
with a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
group of *real humans* on a specific topic, without having to reveal
http://werd.io/2015/help-me-debug-a-personal-project.) Your example
about
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
advertising is another extension of this thinking. The user can
retain
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
control over the personal details that they share when interacting
with an
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
application. Instead of social networks that are purely
person-to-person,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
perhaps instead we could build relationships that are purely
context-to-context.
Data permanence
Why is it that my Dropbox files don’t appear in my Google Drive? Why
can’t I send a Facebook message from my email client? Urbit is
designed
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
with the intention of storing your data permanently: both the state
of your
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
applications and your filesystem data. Forget the long-term
implications of
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
this, in the meantime it’s the natural place for you to ease the pain
of
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
interoperating with the web services of today. With a stateful
client, like
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Urbit, connected to all of your web services you can actually make
them work
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
together as they should. In some far future it means we should be
able to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
address this message as
/~talsur-todres/mail/urbit-dev/~2015.10.31..11.29
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
and get the exact state of this message as I’m typing it. Well, if I
were
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
typing it into an Urbit that was a more mature piece of software.
Reputation and content quality
With the rise of search the modern web is almost entirely structured
post-facto. Because there’s no fundamental system of reputation
built in to
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the internet stack information has to be organized by an outside
authority.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
This creates a kind of strange hierarchy of control when it comes to
relevance. Google is a fantastic, incredible company, but it isn’t
directly
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
incentivized to solve the underlying problem. If we could reliably
attribute
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
content to individuals it would be much easier to bundle that created
content with structured data, and leave it to the user to decide what
parts
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
of that data to share publicly, semi-publicly, or not at all. Let’s
say I
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
want to read first-hand accounts of the 2011 T ohoku earthquake and
tsunami.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Not news articles, not secondary sources — but individual experiences.
Perhaps most people don’t want to share those with attribution. No
problem,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
pseudomyity works really well for something like this. The semantic
web is
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
a great idea, but without a strong identity solution that structured
data is
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
useless. For search to really get us to what we want we need a
combination
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
of an identity solution and a structured data model. Reputation
extends
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
itself into a lot of other areas as well. Do you really trust Yelp
reviews?
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Solving reputation in a decentralized way gives us the ability to
trust and
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
build meaningfully on top of many kinds of content.
Modular applications
http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/10/do-one-thing.html. With an Urbit
it’s easy
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
to imagine actually building small, single purpose applications that
the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
user can compose themselves. Because of our current system software
nightmare each service has to implement complete suites of
functionality
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
independently to hang on to as many users as possible. Having people
bouncing around between services is bad for business. Do I really
need
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
multiple writing interfaces? How about a single writing interface
that I
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
can just easily connect to email, notes, or even Twitter or Facebook?
That’s a good start. Then imagine if we can simply apply the unix
philosophy to high level applications — sort of as if you took all our
modern web applications, broke them into tiny pieces and made them
interoperate with one another.
My own network of devices
Each Urbit at the sort of ‘human sized’ 2^32 tier of the address space
also signs the certificates for ~64K children. In practice that
means that
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
I can run a whole fleet of Urbits that are syncing my state and data
as I
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
see fit. I think the canonical example here is a fridge (why does
the IoT
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
always start with a fridge?), but wouldn’t it be nice if my biometric
devices were actually just running as a part of the same networked
computer
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
that I owned? Urbit is designed to treat network resources like local
resources, so getting my fleet of Urbits to work together is baked in
from
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the outset. What about these seeing spaces that Bret Victor has been
talking about? How are all those devices going to interact with one
another? These examples are from the future, but it’s not technically
infeasible today. Today Urbit more or less duplicates the
functionality of
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Dropbox. Not so successfully for large files, but I can easily write
code
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
on an Urbit running on my laptop and have it sync both to a server in
the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
cloud and a desktop in the office. GitHub is great, but isn’t the
whole
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
point of Git decentralization? And wouldn’t it be nice if GitHub
were open
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
source so you could modify and extend the interfaces?
There are so many dreams from the history of computer science and
interaction design that have either not been realized, or have been
lost
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
during this early phase of the internet. Networked computing is
still so,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
so young and is increasingly a monoculture. Urbit is a construction
site,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
certainly, but it’s a construction site designed as a counterpoint to
that
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
monoculture. At the heart of our project is concerned with asking,
how can
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
we build a more humane computing experience for the individual? At
present
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
we think we have an outline for an answer, but we need others to
participate
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
in fleshing out what that future might look like. Urbit is not (and
cannot,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
by design) prescribe to its users how it can be used. Urbit is an
open
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
ended tool and is meant to capture the imaginations of both its early
pioneers and its most naive users.
So, what else can I clarify or elaborate on? Your perspective is much
appreciated — keep it coming!
G
Raymond,
That is a fine answer for someone who understands programming and
computing. For a semi-technical person who is only "Internet savvy"
it makes
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Urbit sound like a better form of an open identification system. For
an
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
average current internet users (and potential future Urbit) user it
is way
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
over their head. Which is fine, if you are reaching out to more
technical
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
users and early adopters.
There currently is no Urbit for Dummies. The existing articles/docs
focus on why the internet is broken and how Urbit is going to fix it.
Great.
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
But to the uninitiated, Urbit looks like some sort of old terminal
interface
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
with an over-engineered chat client. Which is fine, if that is the
state of
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
the art for Urbit2015. But the documentation / propaganda does not
clearly
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
indicate - for average folks - what the big deal is.
Ok, Urbit can be viewed through a browser, and communicate over the
internet. Does it interact with existing platforms like Twitter and
Facebook? Could existing web portals make themselves Urbit-friendly
in some
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
fashion?
Currently urbit is a command line interface. Will it get a graphical
interface? Will that be in the browser, as an application running on
a Unix
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
partition, or something on Windows/Mac.
Can you develop 3rd party programs on top of Urbit? Do those programs
need to be crafted in Hoon,or can 3rd party developers develop on top
of the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
underlying Urbit foundation with existing programming languages?.
Does Urbit have unique features that make it more defensible to
hacking,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
DOS attacks, or government/ISP censorship?
Please don't take the time to answer any of these questions. I only
bring them up to illustrate the level of ignorance among your future
non-technical user base.
Most importantly: what is the vision for where Urbit is going. What is
Urbit2018 going to look like? What about Urbit2020?. I know the
Urbiteers
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
have framed the walls and hooked up the electricity and plumbing, but
what
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
is the place going to look like when the walls are finished, and the
counters are done?
I brought up search earlier. According to this
(
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2010/03/future-of-search.html
),
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Urbit has the potential to un-suck search and dethrone Google. That
is a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
nifty vision, why not update it and mention it?
I also brought up internet advertising. Since individuals own and
control their Urbit, and their private information stays in their
control,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
they may be willing to help make advertising better and more accurate
by
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
more fully giving relevant marketing information. How much is it
worth to a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
pizza company to be able to contact everyone in their zip code with a
special friday offer? They contact UrbitAds, and (waves hands), who
delivers
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
that ad to opted-in Urbit users in only that zip code. If UrbitAds
rakes
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
some money off the top of the transaction and return the rest in the
form of
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
a micropayment to the people who received those ads. Voila, Urbit
gives you
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
filtered internet advertizing, and even pays you for the privilege. ,
That is the kind of sizzle that non-technical users are interested in,
and can understand. Seeing a more tangible vision of what Urbit can
become
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
might make them more willing to become pioneers and sign up for that
rocket
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
to Mars.
Mark
Post by Raymond Pasco
This is one of the purposes of documents like the "design of a
digital
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
republic" one, so any insights as to where that falls short would be greatly
appreciated.
As a "pleb user", you are not a first-class citizen of Internet
now.0,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
unless you're a major geek who confines himself to aging Internet then.0
services (email being the only one that remains at all relevant these days,
and who runs their own mail server and isn't one of the
aforementioned
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
"major geeks"?). Today's J. Q. Plebs can sit down at their computer
and
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
be a
digital serf from beginning to end of their session, even down to logging in
to what Microsoft is calling "Windows-as-a-service" with their MSN account,
and logging in to their copy of Chrome with their Google account.
Bruce
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
Schneier has called this "feudal security" [1] - Google, Microsoft,
Facebook, Twitter, and other major corporations take on all the risk
of
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
running public-facing Internet hosts, while the serfs "work the
land" -
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
which often means something like "use our service and give us pageviews, a
social graph, &c. that's valuable to advertisers".
With Urbit, you do accept a little feudalism up front in your wallet. But
you haven't signed on to work the land as a serf - you've purchased a
freehold. In less metaphorical terms, you've paid a CA to issue you a
certificate for an inherently scarce 32-bit network address. If you
pay
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
~doznec (soon to be ~marzod) for the ticket to ~ramtev-wisbyt,
you're a
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
first-class citizen of the Urbit network, and ~doznec is certainly
not
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
eavesdropping on your communications (which are all end-to-end encrypted)
and selling anything about them to advertisers. You will likely also pay a
hosting company to host your urbit, but this is for the same reason that you
host your Unix servers with a VPS provider and not your bedroom
closet,
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
rather than the same reason that you host your Twitter account with Twitter.
So, what about the "risk of running public-facing Internet hosts"
that
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
necessitated Schneier's "feudal security" in the first place? Here at Urbit,
we think that this is essentially a failure of the design of Unix (remember,
a mainframe OS!) + Berkeley TCP/IP to scale from collegial academic networks
to the worldwide use it sees today. Urbit is the equivalent of moving to a
new house with up-to-code electrical wiring rather than constantly buying
two-prong adapters and having superstitious rituals about which combinations
of things will trip the circuit breakers. Curtis's whitepaper gives
the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
full
explanation, but Arvo is an operating system that is "designed from
the
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Galen Wolfe-Pauly
Post by Raymond Pasco
ground up", to use an awful cliche, to be on a network.
[1]: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/12/feudal_sec.html
Yours,
r
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
"urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an
Post by Burton Samograd
Post by Ross Mohan
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Adam Bliss
2015-10-30 01:09:08 UTC
Permalink
In 2010 Matt Brubeck pointed me to this post:

http://moronlab.blogspot.com/2010/01/nock-maxwells-equations-of-software.html

"To grok Nock, construct a formula f such that *[s f] equals (s - 1) for
any atomic nonzero subject s. The equivalent formula for (s + 1) is [5 0
1]. The first 16 people who mail me a correct answer may (or may not) win a
prize, which may (or may not) be valuable".

I guess I was one of the first 16; this became the first block of "fortuna"
lots (who were also briefly Czars).
Now my interest is piqued, and I hope you can forgive my curiosity, but how
did you come across a galaxy? I assume that anton got ~fyr in some perverse
equity deal with Tlon (pcmonk also appears to own a galaxy ~tug, but
doesn't use it). Were you an employee at one point, or just got in early?
Post by Adam Bliss
Is there a Kelvin Version for this metaphor? I (~lyd) been at least a
Duke, an Emperor, a Carrier, and now apparently a Galaxy?
--Adam
Post by c***@gmail.com
Very nice! I was always under the impression ~zod was "|Tianming|" for
the "mandate of heaven" part (comets are automatically children of ~zod,
it's the "prime galaxy", etc.), didn't even know there was an emperor with
that title. Perhaps we should re-do the titles, name them after nebulae and
galaxies instead now :p
I've always been slightly uneasy about how many galaxies are already
allocated, but it makes sense to at least discourage people from using the
names themselves. People are less likely to mod in their own public key
hash and fork the network for an allocated name, even if it's not in use,
than they are for one blank. They are also (most likely) people or
companies of repute, and so likely to be better rulers than randos on the
internet that allocated themselves a /4 block.
Post by Aaron Beckerman
Hi everyone,
There's an essay, "Design of a digital republic: part 1, goals", on the
http://urbit.org/docs/theory/network-goals
It's about the plan for making a Urbit a decentralized network. "Thus
what seems like an optimal political design: the ugly, centralized,
young larva that’s designed to molt into a beautiful, mature,
decentralized butterfly."
If you think this hypothetical metamorphosis is wicked cool, as I do,
then you might have questions about the ownership of Urbit's 256
galaxies. For example: How many different owners are there? How many
galaxies are held as thanks for donating money to the Urbit project? Who
owns |Attila|?
To help you answer questions like these, I've compiled information about
the galaxies into a JSON file. (It's entirely unofficial and may be
https://gist.github.com/ab9/b10fd296302032c82bed
(Answers to the above questions: 51, 10, Jaan Tallinn.)
Aaron
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "urbit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to urbit-dev+***@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to urbit-***@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...