[comp.org.eff.talk] Nelson's Canon

eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya) (09/10/90)

Amelia's news system is totally trashed for a while.  Back to eos.
You might notice that rule #6 is missing.  I went back to the copy of
Computer Lib/Dream Machines and that rule is missing there.  [Obvious
references to the Monty-Python philosophers sketech, noted.]  Here is
Nelson's Canon as promise to the net and Ted himself.
--enm
-----

Nelson's Canons
A Bill of Information Rights

1. EASY AND ARBITRARY FRONT ENDS.
2. SMOOTH AND RAPID DATA ACCESS.
3. RICH DATA FACILITIES.
4. RICH DATA SERVICES BASED ON THESE STRUCTURES.
5. "FREEDOM FROM SPYING AND SABOTAGE"
7. COPYRIGHT.

1. EASY AND ARBITRARY FRONT ENDS.
   THE TEN-MINUTE RULE
   TEXT MUST MOVE.

2. SMOOTH AND RAPID DATA ACCESS.
   FREEDOM OF ROVING.

3. RICH DATA FACILITIES.
4. RICH DATA SERVICES BASED ON THESE STRUCTURES.
   A. ANTHOLOGICAL FREEDOM.
   B. STEP-OUT WINDOWING.
   C. DISANTHOLOGIAL FREEDOM.

5. "FREEDOM FROM SPYING AND SABOTAGE."
   FREEDOM FROM BEING MONITORED.
   FIDUCIAL SYSTEM FOR TELLING WHICH VERSION IS AUTHENTIC.

7. COPYRIGHT.

It is essential to state these firmly and publically, because you are
going to see a lot of systems in the near future that proport to be
the last-word cat's-pajama systems to bring you "all the information
you need any time, anywhere."  Unless you thought about it you may be
snowed by systems which are inherently and deeply limiting.  Here are
some of the things which I think we all want. (The salesman for the
other system will say they are impossible, or "We don't know how to do
that yet." the standard put down.  But these things are possible, if we
design them in from the bottom up, and there are many different valid
approaches which could bring these thing into being.)

These are rules, derived from common sense and uncommon concern, about
what people can and should have in general screen systems, systems to
read from.

1. EASY AND ARBITRARY FRONT ENDS.

The "front-end" of a system -- that is, the program that creates the
presentations for the user and interacts with him -- must be clear and
simple to use and understand.

   THE TEN-MINUTE RULE. Any system which cannot be well taught to a
laymen in ten minutes, by a tutor in their presence of a responding
setup, is too complicated.  This may sound far too stringent; I think
not.  Rich and powerful systems maybe given front ends which are
nonetheless ridiculously clear; this is a design problem of the
foremost importance.

   TEXT MUST MOVE, that is, slide on the screen when the user moves
forward or backward within the text he is reading.  The alternative,
to clear the screen and lay out a new presentation, is baffling to the
eye and thoroughly disorienting, even with practice.

Many computer people do not yet understand the necessity of this.  The
problem is that if the screen is cleared, and something new then
appears on it, there is no visual way to tell when their new thing
came from: sequence and structure become baffling.  Having it slide
on the screen allows you to understand where you've been and where you
are going; a feeling you also get from turning pages of a book.  (Some
close substitutes may be possible on some types of screen.

On front ends supplied to normal users, there must be no explicit
computer languages requiring input control strings, no visible
esoteric symbols.  Graphical control structures having clarity and
safety, or very clear task oriented keyboards, are among the prime
alternatives.

All operations must be fail-safe.

Arbitrary front ends must be attachable: since we are talking about
from text, or text-and-picture complexes, stores on a large data
system, the presentation front end must be separatable from the data
services provided further down in the system, so the user may attach
his own front-end system, his own styles of operation and his own
private conveniences for roving, editing and other forms of work or
play at the screen.

2. SMOOTH AND RAPID DATA ACCESS.

The system must be built to make possible fast and arbitrary access to
a potentially huge data base, allowing extremely large files (at least
into the billions of characters).  However, the system should be
contrived to allow you to read forward, back, or across links without
substantial hesitation.  Such access must be implicit, not requiring
knowledge of where things are physically stored or what the interest
file names may happen to be.  File divisions must be invisible to the
user in all his roving operations (FREEDOM OF ROVING): boundaries must
be invisible in the final presentations, and the user must not need to
know about them.

3. RICH DATA FACILITIES.

Arbitrary linkages must be possible between portions of text, or text
and pictures; annotation of anything must be provided for;
collateration should be a standard facility, between any pair of
well-defined objects: PLACEMARK facilities must be allowed to drop
anchor at, or in anything.  These features imply private annotations
to publicity-accessible materials as a standard automatic service
mode.

4. RICH DATA SERVICES BASED ON THESE STRUCTURES.

The user must be allowed multiple rovers (movable placemarks at
points of current activity); making possible, especially, multiple
windows (to the location of each rover) with displays of collateral
links.

The system should also have provision for high-level mooting and the
automatic keeping of historical trails.

Then, a complex of certain very necessary and very powerful facilities
based on these things, viz.:

   A. ANTHOLOGICAL FREEDOM: the user must be able to combine easily
anything he finds into an "anthology," a rovable collection of these
materials having the structure he wants.  The linkage information for
such anthologies must be separately transportable and passable between
users.

   B. STEP-OUT WINDOWING: from a place in such an anthology, the user
must be able to step out of the anthology and into the previous
context of the material.  For instance, if he has just read a
quotation, he should be able to have the present anthological context
dissolve around the quotation (while it stays on the screen), and the
original context reappear around it.  The need for this in a
scholarship should be obvious.

   C. DISANTHOLOGIAL FREEDOM: the user must be able to step out of an
anthology in such a way and not return if he chooses.  (This has
important implications for what must also really be happening in the
file structure.)

Earlier versions of public documents must be retained, as users will
have linked to them.

However, where possible, linkages must also be able to survive
revisions of one or both objects.

5. "FREEDOM FROM SPYING AND SABOTAGE."
The assumption must be made at the outset of a wicked and malevolent
governmental authority .  If such a situation does not develop, well
and good; if it does, the system will have a few minimal safeguards
built in.

FREEDOM FROM BEING MONITORED.  The use of pseudonyms and dummy
accounts by individuals, as well as the omission of certain
record-keeping by the system program, are necessary here.  File
retention under dummy accounts is also required.

Because of the danger of file sabotage, and the private at-home
retention by individuals of files that also exist on public systems,
it is necessary to have FIDUCIAL SYSTEM FOR TELLING WHICH VERSION IS
AUTHENTIC.  The doctoring of on-line documents, the rewriting of
history--cf. both Winston Smith's continuous revision of the
encyclopedia in Nineteen Eighty-Four and "The White House"-- is a
constant danger.  Thus our systems must have a number of complex
provisions for verification of falsification, especially the creation
of multilevel fiducials (parity systems), and their storage must be
localizible and separate to small parts of files.

7. COPYRIGHT.

Copyright must of course be retained, but a universal flexible rule
has to be worked out, permitting material to be transmitted and copied
under specific circumstances for the payment of a royality fee,
surcharges on top of your other expenses in using the system.

For any individual section of material, such a royality should have a
maximum: i.e., " by now you've bought it."

Varying royalty rates, however, should be the arbitrary choice of the
copyright holder: except that royalities should not varying sharply
locally within a tissue of material.  On public screens, moving
between areas of different royalties cost must be sharply marked.