The Wisdom of Sir Tim Berners-Lee

 News and politics, Programming, Technology, Web Development  No Responses »
Feb 022013
 

Llewellyn HallYesterday morning I and a colleague made our way to Llewellyn Hall at the Australian National University to hear from the father of the World Wide Web, none other than Sir Tim Berners-Lee.

Amongst his many accolades and roles, Sir Tim is the director of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) and a director of the World Wide Web foundation.  You can read more about him here.

 

Originally, Sir Tim’s (free) public presentation was scheduled on a different date, but due to scheduling changes, invitees to the public event were merged with the Linux Conference keynote on February 1st.  Upon arrival at the hall, we made our way upstairs to the mezzanine level, where we awaited the introductions.

Introduction

The introduction was made by Simon Hackett, co-founder of Internode.  Simon surprises the audience by removing the covering from over his ancient NeXT cube, a machine Sir Tim would have been using at CERN when designing the World Wide Web.  The introduction is succinct but not overly long, there were probably very few in the audience not already familiar with Sir Tim’s background.

Tim Berners-LeeSir Tim is welcomed to the stage with a long applause, he is dressed in a Hawaiian style shirt and appears quite casual, even at ease.  Before long, we’ve begun.

Sir Tim has an interesting way of articulating his ideas, his thoughts appear to be processed in short streams of information which means that he often leaves a sentence half complete.

 

Agenda

His familiarity with a technical audience is evident, punctuating very profound viewpoints interspersed with what I could best describe as geek or programmer humour.  This doesn’t take anything away from the points he is making he outlines – his three main topics don’t in any way stray from importance:

  • Web Standards
  • JavaScript
  • Aaron Swartz

StageBefore I get into the specifics of Sir Tim’s presentation it might be worth a quick read-up of the story of Aaron Swartz.

I didn’t realise that Sir Tim had been scheduled to testify on his behalf, nor did I expect Sir Tim to cover the sad and tragic events of Aaron’s fate at this forum.

Afterwards, I reflected on the significance of Sir Tim’s words, and more specifically on the repercussions what had happened to Aaron Swartz.

Disclaimer

Apologies in advance to Sir Tim if my interpretation of his lecture misses the point.  He is clearly gifted when it comes to technology, but can be a little tricky to follow at times.  What follows is a summary based on the notes I took down during the lecture.

I’ve tried to format the text into a logical grouping, some of the points may be out of sequence from what was said chronologically during the lecture.

Web Standards and the Internet as an Open Platform

The web divide.. as the web expands and advances the adoption gap widens.  What are the human right impacts of access to the Internet?

Programmers vs. no programmers: non-programmers see computers as white goods.  The contents (apps) as consumables; they aren’t aware they can write their own.

Programmable web pages vs. static pages

HTML 5 provides many opportunities to craft application logic around content, but there is a battle waging between native platform applications and websites – native apps use the Internet but hide the URL, creating (essentially) walled gardens.

Multi-platform apps; native applications = ‘off the web’. Native apps hide URL, can’t be bookmarked or shared. Good example, use of HTML 5: Financial Times site – bookmark the mobile page, page = mobile app. Offline mode is implicit, accessing the page stores (caches locally) linked pages for offline reading.

Languages & HTML

Early on the major advances came in the form of type-checked vs. non-type checked languages.  The next paradigm in languages will leap forward. Progress has increased, less time between changes/improvements.

JavaScript is ascending, APIs more prevalent. Interface tools are becoming standard.  HD video/video (data) has increased in terms of traffic share (compared to static text, e.g. HTML). Not a drama; HTML is still growing, the web is not dying.

HTML5 video tag is one-way communication. How about p2p, or chat based video (conferencing)? APIs .. Refining patterns and practices.. Standards.. Display/output of apps/content needs to account for varied resolution (billboards to handheld mobile devices) – display needs to scale. Sir Tim processes information at a great rate, it would be amazing to have him chat with Jason Silva.

Rights and Legalities

Your own machine/PC – rights to install your own software.. decline in the usage of PGP verses the joke that bank security is..yikes. It’s important that users understand security for their own safety (e.g. to prevent phishing).

Brings up another point – your browser works for you (user agent), but does it?  We have to be cognisant that not all software has the user’s best interests at heart – nor does all software act on behalf of the user.

Aaron Swartz

To be honest, I only had a peripheral knowledge of what happened to this gifted individual, who managed so much success at an early age.  To be honest, I also had no idea that he was a bit of a crusader for open data, which appears in hindsight to be a factor in the sad events leading up to the taking of his own life.

In brief, Aaron pulled down paid content (during a promotional period, content was free for a limited time) and distributed it freely. These were academic texts normally blocked/locked pay per use.  Instead of being charged with copyright infringement, prosecutors instead laid charges of ‘Breaking into computer system’ which is a felony charge.

This damaging charge can be widely interpreted by prosecution and the law, and also spans breaking terms of service agreements. Breaking into JStore would have been different – he had just downloaded information from a public space to a machine he owned (and no other malicious or damaging actions).

Prosecution threw the book at him, making the case that ‘having tools = intent to use’, therefore worst intentions were assumed instead of proven.  Aaron’s family tried to get charges reduced to misdemeanour, however the prosecution wouldn’t budge; jail time was sought.

After Aaron took his own life, the charges were summarily dropped. One obvious outcome from his tragic event – the law must be changed!  JStore evidentially held no grudge, law enforcement forced the charges.

There is a tribute to Aaron Swartz online at the moment, authors are providing copies of papers in PDF format and using the hashtag #pdftribute.

Legislation

Cybercrime is misunderstood in legal circles, so the applicable laws are very vague.  Prosecution has wide latitude to interpret and prosecute.

Current laws for physical property are being applied to digital media. Laws need overhaul.  Government data (tax payer funded) should be open, public data which is something Aaron Swartz crusaded for. Extensions to copyright needs review.

Q & A

There was limited time, so a few questions were posed from both online and the audience.  I did my best to capture the essence of both the questions and the answers, but sadly these are my notes – so they are not verbatim.

Q: How to describe to a teenager the present and future of the Internet
A: Web is an open platform. Web is what you make it.

Q: How to overcome issues in TCP?
A: not my layer (loud applause)

Q: How important is net neutrality
A: How important? (extremely).  It could be as simple as a (QoS) quality of service issue – commercial interests shouldn’t block or take priority access.

Q: HTML5 standard allowing proprietary plugins?
A: DRM? Sort of defeats the open platform ideal, especially if it breaks pages/sites/content when the locked down component isn’t used or installed. Can understand why people would want this capability, e.g. musicians/content producers need to make a living. How do we build systems which reward the consumer and the content creator (and not the middle man so much)? If it requires new protocols, let’s do it.

Q: Why didn’t MIT ask prosecutors to drop the case against Aaron Swarz?
A: Unclear (note: I didn’t note any extra comments on this answer)

Q: What issues are there with mandatory data retention?
A:  Many.  Can’t distinguish between users on a specific connection, 2 year record of a full history.. potential cache of sensitive or damning information (dynamite)

  • · Information security risk
  • · Impossible to be 100% secure
  • · It’s dynamite.. handle it like nuclear waste
  • · Massive amount of data

Q: After 20 years, how do you feel about the HTML Blink Tag?
A:  Blink tag sucked then, sucks now will always suck. <I wonder how he feels about the marquee tag?>

That’s a wrap.  Sir Tim is unquestionably a wealth of knowledge, he covered so many different, but important topics, I’m glad people of hiss calibre are still around and helping to influence things for the better.

Late Notice.. Interesting Public Presentation Tomorrow

 Copyright Matters, Free and Fun Stuff, News and politics  No Responses »
Mar 292012
 

‘Hunting the Rogues and Breaking the Internet: a new front in the online copyright enforcement battle’

Associate Professor Kimberlee Weatherall (Sydney)

2-3.30pm, Friday 30 March, 2012
Rogers Room, Woolley Building (A20), University of Sydney — see map: http://db.auth.usyd.edu.au/directories/map/building.stm?location=12E

Abstract:

The Internet Blackout in January 2012 saw thousands of websites ‘go dark’ to protest proposed US laws designed to implement a ‘multisystem denial of service attack’ against alleged IP-infringing websites by making them both unfindable, and by cutting off any financial support. Within days, the laws – known as SOPA and PIPA – were effectively dead. But when and how did such laws even reach the stage of serious discussion?  This paper will look at what’s changed, and how and why regulating internet intermediaries and making them the internet ‘police’ has gradually become more acceptable to governments.

About the presenter:

Kimberlee Weatherall is an Associate Professor at the Sydney Law School (http://sydney.edu.au/law/about/staff/KimberleeWeatherall/). Prior to joining the School in 2012, Kimberlee held positions at the University of Queensland, the University of Melbourne and the Intellectual Property Research Institute of Australia. Kimberlee teaches and researches in intellectual property law, with a particular interest in digital copyright, the relationship between international trade and intellectual property, and the systems for administration and enforcement of intellectual  property rights. She has been a member of the Law Council of Australia IP Subcommittee since 2006 and sits on the board of the Australian Digital Alliance and the Arts Law Centre of Australia.

Media @ Sydney is presented by the Department of Media and Communications, University of Sydney: http://sydney.edu.au/arts/media_communications/
For further information, contact Lukasz Swiatek (lukasz.swiatek@sydney.edu.au) or Gerard Goggin (gerard.goggin@sydney.edu.au).

ACTA treaty mauled in hearings

 Copyright Matters  No Responses »
Mar 262012
 

Author: John Hilvert
Mar 23, 2012
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/294749,acta-treaty-mauled-in-hearings.aspx

Power to rights holders is a reason not to ratify agreement, say critics.
 
Academics have savaged the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) treaty over the power it affords intellectual property rights holders during a second round of joint committee hearings in Canberra.
 
Associate Professor Kimberlee Weatherall said the treaty – if ratified by Australia – would extend new powers to rights holders, despite assurances given by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) and representatives of the Attorney-General’s office.
 
While she accepted that ACTA’s ratification would not involve new legislation, Weatherall said the treaty expanded the reach of existing laws that governed commercial-scale infringements.
 
Laws relating to these types of infringements are currently dealt with by individual countries per directions in the existing World Trade Organisation agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS).
 
Weatherall called for ratification of the ACTA to be delayed or canned altogether on grounds including that the agreement’s provisions aren’t accepted as a legitimate basis for international intellectual property standards and that there are few benefits and many costs for Australians in the treaty.
 
She also argued the treaty was tainted by narrow consultations, redundant in the face of existing multilateral forums, and did not counter-balance powers given to rights holders with user rights of access.
 
In addition, Weatherall said that ratification could undermine regional relations with major trade partners that had expressed concerns over the treaty, such as China and India.
 
Weatherall received some support from fellow academic Dr Hazel Moir, who attacked the Government and DFAT for failing to outline the "net benefit" of ratifying the treaty.
 
Moir said the main beneficiaries of ACTA were overseas firms and that there was a general lack of research to support ratification of the treaty.
 
Moir also attacked the validity of research before the committee by rights holders that detailed lost business and the price of infringement on the music industry.
 
Meanwhile, Australian National University College of Law associate professor Dr Matthew Rimmer attacked a DFAT National Interest analysis [pdf] as inadequate and unsatisfactory.
 
He said DFAT failed to explain how mandatory and discretionary obligations imposed by the treaty would be implemented in practice.
 
Rimmer also sought explanation of the so-called ACTA Committee’s ability to change rules and standards, arguing its existence could subvert international standards and enact tougher enforcement regimes with little external scrutiny, causing fragmentation to intellectual property laws.

 Older Entries