Wishlists for "R7RS Medium" and the large language

4 views
Skip to first unread message

Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen

unread,
Mar 12, 2022, 4:36:29 PMMar 12
to scheme-re...@googlegroups.com
To streamline the discussion and to increase the usefulness of the
recent ideas, I am wondering whether it makes sense to create and
publish a document, which can be collaboratively edited (e.g. an
Etherpad/Google Docs/... document) where everyone can just write down
their ideas, visions, and wishes concerning the things we have been
discussing and concerning R7RS large in general.

It is not meant to discuss the things within the document; its purpose
would be to brainstorm and to collect all ideas that are floating
around.

I have some hopes that it would be helpful; here, on the mailing list,
many discussions quickly go into details, which is important but only
as a second step. The first one should be to get a feeling for the big
picture that is in our combined minds.

What do you think? If you agree, what would be a good medium? When
there has been enough activity, we can post the results here so they
are documented, and then we have to do quite some review.

Marc

Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide

unread,
Mar 12, 2022, 5:43:19 PMMar 12
to scheme-re...@googlegroups.com, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen

Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <marc....@gmail.com> writes:
> What do you think? If you agree, what would be a good medium? When
> there has been enough activity, we can post the results here so they
> are documented, and then we have to do quite some review.

For a medium, the best I know is cryptpad:

https://cryptpad.digitalcourage.de/code/

The main advantage is that this is encrypted with the clientside key, so
there is no sensitive data on the server and it is easy to create small
breakout documents in a limited group that are then only accessible in
that group (and not available from the server).
And it’s fully free software.

Best wishes,
Arne
--
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de
signature.asc

John Cowan

unread,
Mar 12, 2022, 6:03:17 PMMar 12
to scheme-re...@googlegroups.com, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 5:43 PM Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide <arne...@web.de> wrote:
 
The main advantage is that this is encrypted with the clientside key, so
there is no sensitive data on the server and it is easy to create small
breakout documents in a limited group that are then only accessible in
that group (and not available from the server).

Can you explain why you want to do standards development in secret?  Ethical issues aside, if the key is lost, part of the history of the development of the standard becomes permanently inaccessible.

Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen

unread,
Mar 13, 2022, 4:40:24 AMMar 13
to John Cowan, scheme-re...@googlegroups.com
Let me add that it is part of my wishlist proposal to copy the
document to this list making it part of the history. Think of it like
people meeting in a room collecting R7RS Large wishes and publishing
the collection at the end of their meeting.

In any case, the meeting should be open as the process here so far, so
a globally accessible document would be fine. I understand that not
all people would want to use non-free software, so Google Docs may be
out.

Arne, can you set up a cryptpad document that is accessible by
everyone (possibly after posting a key on this list)?

Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide

unread,
Mar 13, 2022, 6:40:24 PMMar 13
to scheme-re...@googlegroups.com, John Cowan, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen

Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <marc....@gmail.com> writes:

> Am So., 13. März 2022 um 00:03 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <co...@ccil.org>:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 5:43 PM Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide <arne...@web.de> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The main advantage is that this is encrypted with the clientside key, so
>>> there is no sensitive data on the server and it is easy to create small
>>> breakout documents in a limited group that are then only accessible in
>>> that group (and not available from the server).
>>
>> Can you explain why you want to do standards development in secret?
>> Ethical issues aside, if the key is lost, part of the history of the
>> development of the standard becomes permanently inaccessible.

This is for live-collecting, not for storage. After the interactive
discussion, export it and posts it to the email list.

Would you want to store every accidental paste in public?

> Let me add that it is part of my wishlist proposal to copy the
> document to this list making it part of the history. Think of it like
> people meeting in a room collecting R7RS Large wishes and publishing
> the collection at the end of their meeting.

That’s what I mean, yes.

In a real-world discussion there is the option to say “please keep this
out of the protocol; I did not mean it like that and people will
misinterpret it”.

If you discuss interactively in public, you lose that — and people
self-censor.

Look at how easy my argument for privacy-preserving discussion-platforms
can be misinterpreted as wanting to discuss in secret.

Think of it like a break-out room. In the EU parliament there is a mode
of discussion in export meetings where everything is OK to be quoted,
but without naming the person who said it.

During the discussion you need to know who said what and when, but
afterwards that might be problematic.

> In any case, the meeting should be open as the process here so far, so
> a globally accessible document would be fine. I understand that not
> all people would want to use non-free software, so Google Docs may be
> out.
>
> Arne, can you set up a cryptpad document that is accessible by
> everyone (possibly after posting a key on this list)?

Yes. Once the link is posted, it is public: The key is in the link.

For example this one is public (now):
https://cryptpad.digitalcourage.de/code/#/2/code/edit/1ihOWsqkz+np7YViV-SwCcnM/

But here the history is also public. For interactive discussions I’d
rather export from this after the discussion and post it here — or
import the export into a new pad.
signature.asc

John Cowan

unread,
Mar 14, 2022, 11:21:45 AMMar 14
to Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide, scheme-re...@googlegroups.com, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 6:40 PM Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide <arne...@web.de> wrote:
 
In a real-world discussion there is the option to say “please keep this
out of the protocol; I did not mean it like that and people will
misinterpret it”.

If you discuss interactively in public, you lose that — and people
self-censor.

That's a rather strong term for "exercise some caution in what they say."  For myself, I always assume that what I say and do can become public knowledge in the Age of Surveillance; this is made tolerable because I also assume that nobody cares about most of it.
Think of it like a break-out room. In the EU parliament there is a mode
of discussion in export meetings where everything is OK to be quoted,
but without naming the person who said it.

In matters of life and death, either physical or political, such compromises are perhaps necessary.  We in the Scheme community are not faced with such extremes.

As WG2 Chair it is not my concern how Committee F operates.  I think, however, that the openness of WG1, where everything was part of the public record, had a great deal to do with its acceptance.  Even though only members could post to the list, non-members had indirect channels (sometimes as simple as writing to me or some other sympathetic member), because they always knew what was going on.

Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen

unread,
Mar 14, 2022, 11:26:22 AMMar 14
to John Cowan, Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide, scheme-re...@googlegroups.com
Am Mo., 14. März 2022 um 16:21 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <co...@ccil.org>:

> As WG2 Chair it is not my concern how Committee F operates. I think, however, that the openness of WG1, where everything was part of the public record, had a great deal to do with its acceptance. Even though only members could post to the list, non-members had indirect channels (sometimes as simple as writing to me or some other sympathetic member), because they always knew what was going on.

I would like to see Committee F work exactly as John describes here.
Maybe even formalize the process for non-members by creating a public
discussion list.

PS The idea of the original post in this thread is not to create a
document for discussion but just a document so that everyone can write
down their ideas, wishes, expectations, and general perceptions. The
place to collect, organize and discuss them would be the mailing list.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages