ThePseudoFuturist
Beta member
- Messages
- 1
- Location
- USA
**The following is a somewhat vague idea that I have. I'm not a technology expert, but I'm pretty sure, from the little that I do know, that the technology described below is possible. I may use some of the jargon incorrectly, or betray some ignorance on the mechanics of it, but I thought that I might as well get this idea out there. I think that some some form of the following technology will appear some time in the future. If you find this idea interesting, please disseminate it, whether in conversation or by the sharing of this blog-post. I offer up this idea for anyone to develop. Best, Joe C. Oh, by the way, this is poorly and quickly written**
Imagine a browser that pulls from and displays the contents of two sources each time you open a web page, the html code from the website and another code containing content created by visitors of the website stored on a server controlled by the browser company itself, call this a wiki-server. To illustrate, let's say that you open up a web-page which is a biography of Bill Clinton. If you were using the Wiki-browser, you could make certain marks on the page. Let's say you open a paint tool and draw a mustache on Bill Clinton's upper lip. If you click save edits, your computer sends off the following to a wiki-server with the following content: 1) the url, (2) the user-name of the editor, (3) the date of the edit, (4) the description of the edit (5) category of edit. For example, the following would be sent out after saving the mustache (www.clinton.com/bio.html; mustachemaker432; 11/7/2012; description of line paths, widths, color, style (5) unrestricted).
When another user opens up the page www.clinton.com/bio.html using the browser with the setting "Show All Edits," The browser would display the source code for the webpage and display all of the edits made the page of which it had received descriptions from a wiki-server. In short, this user would see the mustache.
This user in turn can make any edits that they wish to to the webpage. Moreover, when on the webpage, the user can remove any edits made by anyone temporarily from the display on their screen (and some permanently, to be described later).
When the user is surfing, the user can decide whose edits, what type of edits, and what time period of edits to show, also what categories of edits to show (we'll get to category later). Users can chose to look at just their friends' edits, maybe certain blogger's edits, edits from people they follow on twitter, all edits, edits from women, edits from people over 45, etc, any perimeter's found in the person's profile. Let's say that you watched a video on Youtube and it would show all the comments from your friends on the page. Or their are a group of liberal bloggers, who spend time commenting on conservative websites, if you chose to limit to that group of liberal bloggers, their comments would be seen when you browsed those particular websites.If you don't care to much for fake mustaches, you could limit the types of edits that you view to comments, or comments and pictures, or just links. If you want to see just the comments that appeared after some shocking relevant news came out, you could do that to.
Now, on to categories. The category of an edit determines its permanence. An "unrestricted" edit, once saved by the user always remains in the database. These edits are never removed, but any user can choose not to show them. Another, category of edits are "elected," these, once saved, remain until they are voted down. Another category is "simple," these once saved can be removed by anyone. Also, edits can be in the category of "esoteric," which means that they will only show up to certain users. There will also be customizable categories. The following is the one that I'm most excited about:
Call this category "verified." The only type of edits available are doing a strike-through of text or highlighting a text. If the user sees that a statement made on a web-site is false, they can strike through the text, they will then be prompted to cite "acceptable sources." They will in turn highlight passages on other "approved webpages" which will now show up as citations for the strike-through. For instance, if I were on a web-page that stated that "there are no transitional fossils," I would strike-through the passage, and highlight portions of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil. After saving this edit, anyone who is including "verified" edits, will see the passage "there are no transitional fossils" struck, with a link to the transitional fossils Wikipedia page. Also, if the user wishes to provide a citation for a passage on a page which they believe to be true, they can do it in the same manner as they would provide disproving citations for misstatements. This might sound like a huge mess, but the problem with content control here is not any more of an issue than content control on Wikipedia. There would be the same type of restrictions and administrative privileges as that website would enjoy. This means that your browsing would be significantly enhanced, as you would no longer be subject to misinformation on the internet, which, perhaps, is one of its greatest flaws. In short, the internet can be made to do what it is meant to, i.e. spread knowledge.
Imagine a browser that pulls from and displays the contents of two sources each time you open a web page, the html code from the website and another code containing content created by visitors of the website stored on a server controlled by the browser company itself, call this a wiki-server. To illustrate, let's say that you open up a web-page which is a biography of Bill Clinton. If you were using the Wiki-browser, you could make certain marks on the page. Let's say you open a paint tool and draw a mustache on Bill Clinton's upper lip. If you click save edits, your computer sends off the following to a wiki-server with the following content: 1) the url, (2) the user-name of the editor, (3) the date of the edit, (4) the description of the edit (5) category of edit. For example, the following would be sent out after saving the mustache (www.clinton.com/bio.html; mustachemaker432; 11/7/2012; description of line paths, widths, color, style (5) unrestricted).
When another user opens up the page www.clinton.com/bio.html using the browser with the setting "Show All Edits," The browser would display the source code for the webpage and display all of the edits made the page of which it had received descriptions from a wiki-server. In short, this user would see the mustache.
This user in turn can make any edits that they wish to to the webpage. Moreover, when on the webpage, the user can remove any edits made by anyone temporarily from the display on their screen (and some permanently, to be described later).
When the user is surfing, the user can decide whose edits, what type of edits, and what time period of edits to show, also what categories of edits to show (we'll get to category later). Users can chose to look at just their friends' edits, maybe certain blogger's edits, edits from people they follow on twitter, all edits, edits from women, edits from people over 45, etc, any perimeter's found in the person's profile. Let's say that you watched a video on Youtube and it would show all the comments from your friends on the page. Or their are a group of liberal bloggers, who spend time commenting on conservative websites, if you chose to limit to that group of liberal bloggers, their comments would be seen when you browsed those particular websites.If you don't care to much for fake mustaches, you could limit the types of edits that you view to comments, or comments and pictures, or just links. If you want to see just the comments that appeared after some shocking relevant news came out, you could do that to.
Now, on to categories. The category of an edit determines its permanence. An "unrestricted" edit, once saved by the user always remains in the database. These edits are never removed, but any user can choose not to show them. Another, category of edits are "elected," these, once saved, remain until they are voted down. Another category is "simple," these once saved can be removed by anyone. Also, edits can be in the category of "esoteric," which means that they will only show up to certain users. There will also be customizable categories. The following is the one that I'm most excited about:
Call this category "verified." The only type of edits available are doing a strike-through of text or highlighting a text. If the user sees that a statement made on a web-site is false, they can strike through the text, they will then be prompted to cite "acceptable sources." They will in turn highlight passages on other "approved webpages" which will now show up as citations for the strike-through. For instance, if I were on a web-page that stated that "there are no transitional fossils," I would strike-through the passage, and highlight portions of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil. After saving this edit, anyone who is including "verified" edits, will see the passage "there are no transitional fossils" struck, with a link to the transitional fossils Wikipedia page. Also, if the user wishes to provide a citation for a passage on a page which they believe to be true, they can do it in the same manner as they would provide disproving citations for misstatements. This might sound like a huge mess, but the problem with content control here is not any more of an issue than content control on Wikipedia. There would be the same type of restrictions and administrative privileges as that website would enjoy. This means that your browsing would be significantly enhanced, as you would no longer be subject to misinformation on the internet, which, perhaps, is one of its greatest flaws. In short, the internet can be made to do what it is meant to, i.e. spread knowledge.
Last edited by a moderator:
