[ryanwaggoner]

Sigh...where to start?

First, I applaud your passion for making the web a better place, and for being willing to put yourself out there and be open with your views.

That said, there's a number of problems with what you're saying and the proposed solution, but let me point out just a few:

1. Normal people don't care. Seriously, my mom uses a handful of websites and doesn't really care about any of the problems you mention. If a solution were offered and it was more convenient, she might use it, but it's just not a big deal to her.

2. Identity and data centralization seem to offer a lot of security risks and the philosophical problem of putting all that data into the hands of one company, or even just a few companies. Making an open, distributed standard sounds good, but in practice, I think a few companies (Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon) would end up handling the gateway role for 95% of users, which puts you in an even more dangerous position.

3. The big players have little incentive to lower barriers to entry, and you have a chicken/egg problem in trying to force them to 'adapt or die'. Also, see #1.

4. If OpenID and OAuth aren't working (agree on the 1st, not sure on the 2nd), why not, and why would this be any different?

5. I don't see any way of implementing something like this over the next 50 years without either a) government mandate, or b) every internet giant getting involved. As I pointed out above, the internet giants are unlikely to do this, and the government getting more involved in the web is the last thing we need.

I think some of the problems you pointed out are legit, but I'm not sure that this kind of a system is really any better. It seems you'd be swapping one set of problems for another, and the new set of problems would seem to make the web extremely vulnerable to being controlled by a few large organizations, or the government. Over time, I see this kind of centralization and "perfect system" model resulting in stagnation and oppression.

[webwright]

"1. Normal people don't care. Seriously, my mom uses a handful of websites and doesn't really care about any of the problems you mention. If a solution were offered and it was more convenient, she might use it, but it's just not a big deal to her."

+1

The OP says why YC won't fund him (single founder, no biz model), but he's overlooking the doozy. YC has freakin' T-SHIRTS that say "Make something people want". Not is this addressing a problem that 99.9% of people don't have, but it's also something that the big web properties don't want (for a number of reasons).

Solve problems. Solve painful problems. Or, if you're more consumer focused, get smart about dopamine.

[ken]

It's not a question of "normal people" versus ... well, whatever category you want to put here. It's a question of when it's painful: nobody cares about exporting all their data, until their online service loses their account. Then everybody cares.

It's a problem 99.9% of people don't have now, but could have at any time. Seatbelts are also a solution to a problem 99.9% of people don't have, but that doesn't mean I don't want one.

(Is it profitable? Maybe not -- look how few people make backups now. But that's distinct from not wanting to have had it.)

[webwright]

"It's a problem 99.9% of people don't have now, but could have at any time."

You, sir, have aptly described the difference between vitamins and painkillers. Tylenol (one painkiller) is bigger than the entire vitamin industry. The whole industry.

That aside, in the "vitamin" world, I think success is based on how likely you are to have that problem. Everyone knows someone who's gotten in a car wreck. Everyone knows someone who has had a hard drive crash. How many people have had Flickr accidentally wipe their photos? If you're selling risk mitigation, it's gotta be pretty risky.

[jnorthrop]

"Sigh...where to start?"

I wish you wouldn't have started off with that. It's insulting and doesn't add to the discussion. Just because you see the author's conclusions as somewhat naive (which you've articulated) doesn't make it OK to belittle his effort. FWIW, Other than that snide start it's a thoughtful post.

[ryanwaggoner]

Wow...I really didn't mean it this way at all, but now that you point it out, I can see what you mean.

What I meant was that I feel the same way about some of the issues he raised, and I think that there are lots of large-scale improvements that could be made on the web, but the scope of the problem makes it overwhelming to deal with.

The "where to start" piece in particular sounds bad, but I just meant that I wasn't sure how to articulate the problems I see with his solution. I get that it doesn't come off that way, especially now that I read it. Apologies to the author.

I didn't mean to belittle his effort in the least. It's a noble task to try and effect change in such a large domain because you believe in it.

[markup]

No need to apology, I did read that premise the way you explained it right now -- might have been naive now that I think about it. ;-)

[volida]

now it's offending because people say "sigh"?

[gnaritas]

What do you mean now? That's always been insulting, even in person.

[volida]

He/She spent 15 minutes to explain his thoughts. How's that insulting?

If he used that word alone then probably you could assume it's insulting.

[gnaritas]

It doesn't matter how well he explained himself, sighing is equivalent to rolling your eyes, it's the tone it sets that is taken badly. I actually agree with everything he said, I'm just pointing out that sighing is offensive; he basically said "you're ignorant, and let me explain why". The quality of the explanation makes little difference.

[omouse]

SIGH...where to start?

You're barely contributing to the conversation here. The world isn't lovey-dovey. If you can't take the heat, get outta the kitchen.

[markup]

Normal people don't care about a lot of stuff, but this doesn't stop research and development. The world would be a really boring place if we had to think solutions targeted at the "average Joe". I do care about this and if someone offered me a solution for these issues I'd buy it right away.

In regards to 2., you are right but today the same risk is multiplied on dozens of websites that I know basically nothing about. I don't know how they store and backup my stuff and I don't know how they deal it.

As per 4. OpenID and OAuth DO work (I use them a lot), what I tried to say is that they do not solve the underlying issue.

[chrischen]

You just described my original idea in that site (sorta)! But I changed it cause i realized normal people usually use , as Ryan said, a handful of applications. Th is idea would work better as a marketing tool for someone who wants to maintain a presence on various networks though.

[zandorg]

Maybe your 'Mom' doesn't like it, but that doesn't mean everyone, just your 'Mom'!