[OpenID] Finally the Shit has hit the fan!

[Steven Livingstone-Perez]

The idea in principal appeals but a lot seems to be dependent on browser
vendor support & OpenID in the browser should really have been (and should
still be [1]) a no brainer for the browser vendors - I anticipate the same
level of "uptake" by them for this.

 

In short, until we can get the browsers to put social as a first class
citizen (and look how long universal OpenSearch support in the browsers
took) we have a battle.

 

Still, small steps so following with interests.

 

/steven

http://livz.org

 

[1] http://radar.oreilly.com/2008/12/getting-openid-into-the-browse.html

 

From: openid-general-bounces at lists.openid.net
[mailto:openid-general-bounces at lists.openid.net] On Behalf Of John Panzer
Sent: 07 June 2010 17:15
To: SitG Admin
Cc: openid-general at lists.openid.net; openid-specs at lists.openid.net
Subject: Re: [OpenID] Finally the Shit has hit the fan!

 

It's not a centralized component[1].

 

I'm disappointed in Eran's post and wrote a response yesterday:

 

http://www.abstractioneer.org/2010/06/xauth-is-lot-like-democracy.html

Unfortunately, FUD sells and Eran's post is being retweeted and cited pretty
widely.  If you're going to agree with his objections, please read the
rebuttals as well, and explain why you think they're not sufficient.

 

-John

 

[1] There is nuance here which I'm ignoring in order to get a clear message
across.  The initial implementation has a single centralized piece, a DNS
entry, but no centralized services or data storage at all.  The end game is
a fully decentralized system, but you need a path to get there.  Go read the
details at
http://www.abstractioneer.org/2010/06/xauth-is-lot-like-democracy.html or at
http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2010/04/using-xauth-to-simplify-social-web.ht
ml.

 

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 7:40 AM, SitG Admin <sysadmin at shadowsinthegarden.com>
wrote:

>http://hueniverse.com/2010/06/xauth-a-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-id
ea/

 

Well, his points against it are quite valid. Having a centralized component
to a decentralized architecture, especially one that all parties must *rely*
upon, would violate the essential spirit of the idea.

 

(That said, if any of them *want* to do it, they may do so unofficially,
with neither the involvement nor sanction of the community. Then, when the
inevitable user backlash arrives - or, as you put it, "the shit hits the
fan" - they alone suffer the reputation hit and loss to market share,
compounded by having done so against the recommendations of the majority of
the OpenID movement itself.)

 

I realize that you're in favor of the centralized component, but please do
try to understand why this philosophy is diametrically opposed by OpenID.

 

-Shade


_______________________________________________
general mailing list
general at lists.openid.net
http://lists.openid.net/mailman/listinfo/openid-general

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20100607/12ce464d/attachment.html>