BurningbirdRecovered from the Wayback Machine.
One last post.
Another Plutonian has come over to the MT side — welcome Will otherwise known as Transcendental Petroglyphs.
Now, is Mr. Delacour going to share his Radio to MT conversion secrets and scripts? The world awaits anxiously.
And the question remains: Who’s Next? Who will be the next to …
…Come over to the MT side…
Recovered from the Wayback Machine.
Shannon recently switched from a Blogger weblog to Movable Type, and did a nice, neat job of it, too.
And then I was tripping through the Plutonians and found that Phil Ringalda has moved to Movable Type. That one floored me. If you’ve worked with Blogger, than you know Phil — he’s helped most of us resolve problems we’ve had with Blogger. To see him come over to the MT side was a shock.
Why damme, that MT is bustin’ out all over!
Recovered from the Wayback Machine.
In the previous posting, Dave attached a comment that returns us to the conversation about centralization. However, I don’t expect that we’ll generate any definitive answers to “what is centralization”, as the folks who are interested in distributed systems and P2P have been working this issue for years, with only qualified success.
Centralization hasn’t as much to do with technical points of failure or with issues of deployment as it has to do with control. Centralization implies a single point of control residing in an authority other than yourself.
Is weblogs.com centralized? Yes, from both a control as well as a technology perspective.
Webloggers can automatically invoke the weblogs.com web services, or use the weblogs.com form to invoke the services manually. If the weblog has changed, the blogname and URL are added to the publicly accessible changes.xml file, and eventually to the weblogs.com HTML page. It remains on this page for three hours.
Both the HTML page and the associated XML file and supported services provide a single location to check for recently updated weblogs — a useful technology. However, this single location also leads to the service’s vulnerability.
If the server goes down, weblogs.com is no longer accessible. Dave provided a temporary backup location but if you’re dependent on automated processes to look for the updated information the temporary location didn’t work for you (not unless you wanted to modify your application to point to this new location).
The downtime with weblogs.com last week demonstrates a technical point of failure for a centralized application. There are mechanical methods one can take to avoid this such as the use redundant backup servers, as well as the use of banks of servers. However, as we’ve seen with DoS (Denial of Service) attacks, if there is a determined foe any centralized service can be brought down.
The possibility of technology failure doesn’t concern me in regards to centralized services, as for the most part, this isn’t an issue. As we’ve seen, weblogs.com has rarely been down in the past and the only reason we’re more attuned to the issue now is because of the rather lengthy downtime of the service this last week. Redundant backup servers would have prevented this, but as Dave has said, Userland is a software development company not an ISP. Backup servers are expensive and weblogs.com is a free service.
What does concern me about weblogs.com is the control: Userland has complete control over who shows on this list. And Dave has written filters for this list, as he’s discussed, openly, at Scripting News. (Though these filters may have been removed.)
That’s the danger of centralization.
Are there alternatives? Sure, there are other centralized locations of weblog updates. However, these are also subject to the same technical point of failure as well as issues of control.
Trying to decentralize a service such as weblogs.com would require a new infrastructure overlayed on top of the existing Internet to support the concept of centralized services that are decentralized — in other words to support supplying and consuming information about recently updated weblogs at a single point, the location of which can change from day to day, minute to minute.
Semi-decentralized applications such as Kazaa and Napster don’t provide the technology to solve this problem; they aren’t providing access to centralized resources, they’re providing access to files that can be located on any number of machines.
Until such an infrastructure is in place, we’ll continue to use weblogs.com and benefit from the service, while understanding the limitations inherent with centralized services such as this.
Returning to the comment in the previous post, Dave also mentioned the hypertext link. Now the simple hypertext link truly is a decentralized technology.
Anyone can put a link into their weblog. There is no authority controlling what you can and cannot link to unless you pay attention to the ridiculous and unenforcable “rules” that some web sites publish about deep-linking. Web sites may require permission to access certain pages, but you can place the link on your page — it’s up to the person clicking the link and the web site to negotiate actual viewing of the page.
And if you have a weblog, there is no authority controlling who links to you.
Weblog A links to you and you link to Weblog B, creating an indirect link from A to B. Continuing this process, weblog B links to weblog C and C links to D and D links to E and so on until you have an unbroken chain of weblogging circles forming a living, dynamic community that cannot be controlled and cannot be stopped — not without taking down the Internet, itself. And though some have tried, the Internet is too vast now to be controlled by any one authority.
Centralization. It’s all about control.
Recovered from the Wayback Machine.
Dave responded to my earlier post with a thoughtful and considerate posting that asked a very valid question:
So anyway, here’s a question for Shelley. When I see your site update on Weblogs.Com, I usually go for a visit to see what the bird is burning about now. I think of that as a community feature. Do you think it’s valuable? If not, why do you participate?
First, thanks for stopping by Dave, always appreciated. And as a point of clarification — I dropped that silly rule about comments I had about five minutes after I originated it, so please feel free to drop in with comments.
Back to the question: Why do I participate in pinging weblogs.com, when my interest tends to be on the people aspect of weblogging rather than the technology?
Though my focus is on the participants, I also appreciate much of the technology used in weblogging, particularly the weblogging tools such as Movable Type, Radio, and Blogger. And I also appreciate community services such as weblogs.com that let me know when my favorite webloggers have updated.
To me, technology provides a framework that allows me to communicate with my weblogging community easily and without a lot of hassle. I’ll alway be grateful for the folks who create all this technology that makes my weblogging life a lot easier. Still, technology is only an enabler — the content of the weblogs is the key aspect to “community” in my opinion.
If technology could be considered equivalent to the nerves in the brain, it is the people that provide the chemistry that enables the synaptic (community) connections to be made. Without the chemistry provided by the webloggers, the technology is nothing more than bits and bytes and wires all jumbled about in a chaotic and undifferentiated mess, thrown into the ether.
Consider my own community of webloggers — the virtual neighborhood that I reference fondly and at length. Technology will tell me that Bill Simoni’s weblog can be accessed at the URL, http://radio.weblogs.com/0100111/. And technology can let me know when Bill has updated his weblog, through weblogs.com.
Bill uses technology to create his weblog (using Radio), which is accessed through additional technology (the Internet). And I read the weblog through my browser (Mozilla by preference), contained on my laptop — yet more examples of technology.
However, technology doesn’t tell me that Bill is expecting a baby any day now. And technology doesn’t tell me that Bill has a nice, self-deprecating sense of humor, is pretty excited about the baby, and has a a thing about grammar and spellchecking 😉
That’s community.
If Userland and Movable Type and Blogger were to discontinue innovating their products as of this minute, we would perhaps have less fun toys to work with. We’d miss out on better products, and more reliable hosting, and more interesting ways to post, and better ways to aggregate the postings, and more efficient approaches regarding notification…
…but we’d still have our community.
You’d have to take the Internet down to take down our community, and due to the pervasive nature of the Net, I don’t think this is even possible, now.
Ultimately, the community is not dependent on the technology as much as the technology is, itself, dependent on the community. Because without the community, why would we need the technology in the first place?
And the topic is continued here.
Recovered from the Wayback Machine.
I’ve had entries in my comments in addition to email that the images are overlapping the text when my new weblog is viewed in Netscape 4.7.
This is not an unknown problem with Netscape 4.7 and usually has to do with wrapping the IMG tag in paragraph tags. This is also further complicated by the use of the CSS attribute LINE-HEIGHT.
I’ve experimented around with one of the postings — removing the line-height attribute from the surrounding DIV block, removing automatically generated line breaks so that I can use my own formatting and so on, but from what I can see in Netscape 4.7 on my Linux box, the images are still overlapping the text.
I have the following options at this time:
At this time, I’m following the last option.
For more on Overlap Problem: