Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Can Urbit Reboot Computing?

Urbit seeks to distill computing into its lightest and purest possible form, leaving the user in control of more processes than previously afforded.

Steve A. Johnson/FlickSteve A. Johnson/FlickIt's a common complaint that "computing" is broken. Whether the concern is government surveillance, invasive advertising and malware, censorship by private and public bodies, or the general gulf between user control and control of users, many worry that our amazing network of networks has been slowly atrophying for some time. But a project called Urbit aims to overcome this—by getting humans to start thinking more like Martians

Why is a reboot necessary? The incentives and arrangements developed during the early days of the internet haven't exactly scaled well. Much of our digital infrastructure forces us to rely faceless third parties—Internet Service Providers, software developers, cloud servers, platform administrators, domain-name registrars—in order to connect with others. No one person can presently provide all or most of these functions for themselves. Instead, we each must trust this conglomeration of faraway bureaucracies—in addition to the often-rascally governments that oversee the whole operation.

As a result, our computing experiences will only be as good as this federation of virtual landlords is virtuous. Alas: virtue is not exactly "in" online.

Some developers are seeking to transcend our internet feudalism by minimizing the number of third parties one must patronize to participate in digital society. Open-source operating systems like Linux allow people to take more control over their own computers. Bitcoin substitutes trust in a single payment processor for trust in a cryptographically secure, peer-to-peer network. BitTorrent, similarly, allows individuals to share files using a distributed network that cannot be immediately shut down by targeting any one entity. And several new projects aim to extend this logic to personal computing more generally. There's OpenBazaar, a distributed marketplace platform that wants to be the "Bitcoin of Amazon"—a censorship-resistant e-commerce protocol that empowers buyers and sellers to transact peacefully without a middleman. There's the InterPlanetary File System, or IPFS, which would operate as a kind of BitTorrent for the World Wide Web.

But there is only one project that aims to just start this whole networking thing completely from scratch. It's an "operating function" called Urbit, and it is by far the most fascinating and bizarre of these attempts to reboot computing.

Inside the Urbit Universe

Urbit is brought to you by a man named Curtis Yarvin and a company named Tlon. Much of the commentary about Urbit has focused on the unorthodox political opinions of Yarvin, who is better known in some circles by his nom de plume, Mencius Moldbug. As Moldbug, Yarvin has penned fiery condemnations of democracy, extolled the virtues of historic monarchies, and found himself as a philosophical leader for the budding "neoreactionary" movement. But Urbit is perhaps even more intriguing than its radical creator. 

Urbit is a software stack comprised of roughly five major parts: an operating system (Arvo), two kinds of programming languages that interact together (Nock and Hoon), a network (Ames), and you, the dear user. Combined, this system seeks to distill computing into its lightest and purest possible form, leaving the user in control of more processes than previously afforded.

Arvo: Microsoft has Windows, Apple has Mac OS, and Urbit has Arvo. This is the "kernel" upon which the entire system runs. Arvo starts with a self-compiling command and a basic input/output system. It is quite small, written in roughly 600 lines of the native programming language, Hoon. For frame of reference, Windows 7 is written in about 40 million lines of code. Arvo is small because it is intended to "grow" with a user's event history.

Nock and Hoon: This is the DNA of Urbit, and in true Urbit fashion, it is radically different from the object-oriented programming languages most familiar to laypeople. For the techies out there, Nock is a virtual machine and high-level language that compiles Hoon and is a little bit like Lisp. Hoon is a functional programming language that is a little bit like Haskell. They're quite odd, but totally groovy if you're into the challenge of learning abstract code. For the non-techies out there, all you need to know is that Nock and Hoon comprise the language of Urbit.

Ames: This is the "Urbit network," an encrypted peer-to-peer protocol and namespace. It is here that an Urbit user shapes her identity and interacts with the vast universe of this cyberspace. Unlike in the current system, where you have many digital identities—your IP address and various screennames that may or may not connect to your "real" self—your address is your identity in Ames. 

Starstuff (you): And what are "you" in Urbit? You are a plot. A plot is a 128-bit number that serves as your identity and your address. There are many kinds of plots in Urbit, of different sizes and importance, yet all celestial. The hierarchy is as follows: There are the 8-bit "galaxies" of one syllable; two-syllabled, 16-bit "stars"; the 32-bit, 4-syllable "planets"; 64-bit and 8-syllable "moons"; and finally the 128-bit, 16-syllable "comets." All of these plots map to services and functions that already exist in the current system.

As the Urbit white paper explains, galaxies and stars comprise the network infrastructure, planets are like personal servers, moons are like clients, and comets are like cheap little bots. Control tiers up the hierarchy: Galaxies can issue stars, stars can issue planets, planets can issue moons, and moons can issue bots. A detailed analysis of the law and context guiding these identities in Urbit deserves a separate article, but this is the universe of Urbit in a nutshell.

Urbit has been in the works for at least six years, and despite the mystery and strangeness pervading the previously available documentation, it does indeed actually exist as a testnet and can be downloaded and run by any interested parties. Or, if you'd rather merely dip your toes into this unparalleled experiment in Martian programming, you can jump into the chat to politely pick the brains of the star-men of Urbit.

Declaration of Digital Independence 

By now, this is probably all sounding pretty zany. The Tlon developers will proudly tell you that it is. But when you parse through the underlying values that guide the system, a rather libertarian ethos begins to emerge. Consider Tlon's statement of principles

We believe that general-purpose computing is an essential tool to unlock the power of individual creativity.

We believe that ownership, privacy and control don't need to be sacrificed in exchange for usability, accessibility and reliability.

We believe in the power of the informed crowd to develop and maintain software, through the IETF principles of sincerity and rough consensus. The ability of the engineering community to govern itself through republican forms is not an abstract theory; it's a proven fact.

We believe in both free speech and individual accountability. We believe that a healthy network is one with diverse and well-defined communities, and clear, user-controlled, boundaries between public and private space.

We believe that no software system can replace human trust and communication. Dialogue, judgment and governance are essential to communities of all scales. Code and law can reduce conflict in the common case; they can never handle all exceptions.

If the Founding Fathers were computer programmers designing a new digital republic, their Declaration of Independence might look a bit like the Urbit manifesto. 

As a republic, the "government" of Urbit has one task: "promoting, preserving and protecting Urbit." But in doing so, Yarvin and fellow developer Galen Wolfe-Pauly point out, Urbit should "never fall under any kind of central control."

Much of the language in Urbit's statement of principles reads as if it could have been written by Murray Rothbard himself (indeed, Yarvin frequently cites such luminaries of liberty as Ludwig von Mises and John Perry Barlow as his personal intellectual influences). But "liberty" is not a homogeneous concept. It's important to note that Urbit approaches the problem of "centralized computing" from a radically different position than many of the other projects described above, such as Bitcoin. 

As the Urbit white paper explains, "Bitcoin is a trust-free system; Urbit has a central trust hierarchy"—the nested system of galaxies and heavenly bodies outlined above. However, the initial hierarchy baked into the Urbit platform—namely, the preliminary "crowdsale" of galaxies—may raise eyebrows among "scamcoin"-watchdogs in the cryptocurrency community.

Photo Credit: Steve A. Johnson/Flickr

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • mashed potatoes||

    Well I have completely no idea what any of this means..

  • Rich||

    Then CIO Magazine is for *you*!

  • mashed potatoes||

    Well, even though that stuff is comprehensible, since they have an article on the front page about "inequality plaguing computer science" I am going to go with no, that magazine is not for me.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Inequality means a checksum failure. they've got bad data.

  • Krabappel||

    lol

  • UnCivilServant||

    Sounds too much like work - it won't grow to reach critical mass of user adoption.

  • UnCivilServant||

    To elaborate, I get the impression that the people who have worked on this and are wowed at the concept of this have not worked close to the user level in quite some time. Users by in large mostly care about being able to work the way they're accustomed to and that it works out of the box. This is why smartphones are absurdly popular while being the antithesis of user-controlled computing environments. The familiar 'walled garden' is comfortable, and the average user will happily stay there for as long as they can.

  • ||

    Agreed. However, I do give them bonus points for some humility;

    We believe that no software system can replace human trust and communication. Dialogue, judgment and governance are essential to communities of all scales. Code and law can reduce conflict in the common case; they can never handle all exceptions.

    Somehow, despite all the star-dusty jingo, they've managed to avoid the "Don't be evil, be really evil." magnanimous-villain God-complex stuff. They at least acknowledge that there are problems out there that they haven't conceived and don't insist that, in their all-seeing brilliance, they've already solved (sometimes again).

  • ||

    But a project called Urbit aims to overcome this—by getting humans to start thinking more like Martians.

    Outstanding. Between dehydrated, just-add-water-martians, Illudium Pew 36 Explosive Space Modulators, travelling to Planet X for hair tonic, and, of course, blowing up the Earth since it obstructs the Martian view of Venus, this should give Ron Bailey more toys to play with than time allows and perhaps shut him up about that APG Global Warming nonsense.

    Which should keep him away from the Disintegration Proof Vest...

  • widget||

    Right-click on your Chrome browser and choose "View page source". Tell me the martians haven't already arrived.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Only a fool uses chrome.

  • widget||

    What browser do you use?

  • UnCivilServant||

    FireFool

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    What is it 1999 or are browser warz still a thing?

  • UnCivilServant||

    As far as I can tell, it's 1984.

  • Timon 19||

    For all of Firefox's faults, Chrome is proprietary as all hell, and as Google/Alphabet continues to edge away from their erstwhile motto, there are few large open-source projects that can deliver what is needed online (actually, there are a ton of open-source browsers out there, but none with the name recognition save one).

    Chromium is the open-ish version of Chrome, but still subject to Google's whims, as I understand it.

  • UnCivilServant||

    In many ways, initial complexity can be a feature. Techies can probe away at vulnerabilities and oversights for years in relative obscurity, improving technologies so that new orders of laypeople can eventually participate. User interfaces become sleeker, venture capital starts pouring in, the news media takes notice, and eventually the technology becomes mainstreamed.

    At that point, how is it any different from what came before?

  • mtrueman||

    I think there's a point where diminishing marginal returns kick in. Answering complexity with complexity will eventually result in gridlock. A more user-friendly system doesn't make a system less complex, the opposite is true. It's just the complexity is hidden away under the hood. A more distributive model, if that's what this is about, would avoid some of the problems discussed in the article. The enphasis on functional programming is also a nice feature. These programmes have some advantages over those used those used currently.

    Maybe part of the problem is that the internet was designed by engineers at a time when there was no such thing as a software engineer. Now there are, lots of them. I heard more than half of Stanford graduates each year are in computing. A reboot engineered by those who've taken in all the developments since the initial design might be a good thing.

  • widget||

    I followed Moldbug from very early on. Perhaps he reminded of my first girlfriend who was happy as a clam reading 1000 page tomes of medieval history in bed. Moldbug likes to read the history of the defeated by the defeated. Not that he or my GF are defeatists, but they have a wonderful perspective.

    When he stopped blogging I did read his early attempt at programming development. I didn't grok it. I won't comment on it now as it takes a few days of concentration for the me to understand something like this. But I am pleased that he is alive, well, and recognized.

  • Lee G||

    I hadn't heard about Moldbug for a long time until this article.

  • Jerryskids||

    It will be interesting to see how this thing takes off because I know everybody on my Facebook page, Twitter feed, Youtube channel, and Pinterest board is real interested in internet privacy. They all say they search Google on a regular basis looking for privacy apps at the Apple store to install on their Verizon phones.

  • Rich||

    Aren't they worried about the NSA tracking all their searches and installations?

  • Doctor Whom||

    The NSA and I see what you did there.

  • widget||

    They all say they search Google on a regular basis looking for privacy apps at the Apple store to install on their Verizon phones.

    That's a tad better than buying a VPN or Darknet OS so all your traffic goes directly through the Utah data center.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Does the UDC have better uptime than my current provider?

  • The Other Libertarian||

    ...and do they host any BF4 servers?

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    What you did there, Jerryskids, I sore it.

  • ||

    by getting humans to start thinking more like Martians

    Yep, I stopped reading there. Unsurprising that this is credited to staff; I'd be embarrassed to write something like that.

  • UnCivilServant||

    They credit a lot of things to "staff" on the main H&R page. The article proper has a byline

    Andrea Castillo | June 21, 2016
  • Citizen X||

    Who clicks through to the articles?

  • UnCivilServant||

    If you're commenting, you've made it to the article page - just scroll up.

  • Citizen X||

    That sounds like work.

  • Stilgar||

    Recommend that Reason stick to stuff they know or at least outsource the major bits to those who do. Drivel.

  • UnCivilServant||

    So... you want them to shut down publication?

    Where are we supposed to comment?

  • Hugh Akston||

    Maybe outsource it to someone like the head of a technology policy program at a major think tank?

  • mtrueman||

    Or at least someone who can write.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    LOL. So the upper-scale equivalent of a Wired journalist, then.

  • Rich||

    many people might find it thrilling to moonlight as the king of their own computing galaxy.

    ... euphemisms ....

  • SIV||

    Put Andrea Castillo in charge of H&R.

  • jonnysage||

    Sounds like the plot of Silicon Valley. Design something so amazing and far ahead that no one understands it, and will therefore never use it. The current model dominates for a reason. It works.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Some developers are seeking to transcend our internet feudalism by minimizing the number of third parties one must patronize to participate in digital society. Open-source operating systems like Linux allow people to take more control over their own computers

    Extreme. I remember the Linux revolution of the 90s too.

    Oh, by minimizing the number of third parties, that doesn't involve some sort of Net Neutrality, AKA federal control does it?

  • ||

    The linux revolution didn't happen until well after the 90s.
    At least for most of the population.

  • ||

    I don't know about the internet, but Reason.com certain seems to be going down hill. Ever more ads. Now timed pop-ups that won't go away for 5 seconds. Click bait articles between the main article and comments. Promoted comments.

    It's like buzzfeed only with worse comment software.

  • Drave Robber||

    Urbit chat sounds pretty much like drug-induced poetry:

    what we have is a typechecker
    in the usual sense
    we don't really have a type system
    hoon types are definitely weird
    when there's an infinite loop in fish
  • mtrueman||

    You might want to start with Haskell which has been around for more than a decade and has a variety of reasonable documentation and a larger base of users. It's a challenge in any case but definitely interesting if you are into exploring functional programming.

    http://learnyouahaskell.com/

  • prolefeed||

    Murphy predicted widespread voter anger in November's congressional contests.
    "I don't think democracy allows for this Congress to be do out of step with the American public in compliance with the Second Amendment for long," he said.

  • mtrueman||

    "Andrea Castillo is program manager for the Technology Policy Program at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University."

    A university professor (or is it administrator) who's never heard of Borges, apparently. Only in America...

  • sflicht||

    Andrea has always seemed pretty smart and well-read to me, so I wouldn't be surprised if she did notice the Borges allusion in question. But since I'm confident that 99.99% of readers wouldn't notice or care, I doubt that a sentence pointing it out would have survived the editorial process.

  • mtrueman||

    Here's me thinking that anyone who's had a university education must be familiar with Borges. And you may be right about the author. I thought the piece was such a muddle that an illuminating riff on Borges couldn't help but improve things.

  • Bob Armstrong||

    Click my http://CoSy.com for a far more libertarian approach to taking back control of your computing tools .

  • Roger Knights||

    "constitutes"!!!
    (not "comprises")

  • Hal Geruf||

    galaxies and stars comprise the network infrastructure
    planets are like personal servers
    moons are like clients
    comets are like cheap little bots.

    and black holes are like Hillary's email server.

  • JoelKatz||

    They have no mechanism to agree on who owns what in a decentralized way. Without such a thing, there is simply no way they can have anything but a central authority.

  • cms||

    wow, i find a very cool article here with a lot of engagement to it. install Windows on Android using change my software on Android.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online