Whats the reason people want SOLID running on top of SAFE?

[happybeing]

Gabriel, I agree with you that in theory SAFE could enable apps access to data from other apps, and we could establish our own standards and protocol to do this without Solid.

I don’t think SAFE Drive achieves this, because it is access without understanding, and my point about Solid is that it is an established set of protocols and standards that achieve this right now and are our best bet for mass adoption.

So we could in theory go our own way and achieve this without Solid, but I don’t see any sense in that.

Here’s how I put it back in March:

@happybeing

My impression (still learning) is that Solid is ahead on data standards, data processing, apps (obvs) and access control, but that SAFE is ahead on security, privacy, anonymity, authorisation, decentralisation, accessibility (not in all respects, so debatable). Solid is way ahead in allowing users to extract the maximum value and utility from data, both their own and whatever is public, or shared with them. While SAFE is way ahead on ease of deployment, scalability and maintenance (which ties into accessibility). Solid has a good story on identity, with some aspects we can learn from, but overall SAFE makes identification and authentication almost trivial, whereas it looks a bit of dogs breakfast on the Web (hard to understand, implement and use currently).