51–60 of 158 posts
Free network transfer? Is file0 S3 compatible?
No! I believe if you look for S3 compatible storages you find much better options out there then FILE0. R2, Backbaze and others.
FILE0's mission is to keep things simple for the small guys.
It suffers the usual effect as seen in eg. Wayland. You think the problem is simple and make a new protocol that's simple. Then you find complexity in the problem and solve it with complexity in the solution. Then your protocol becomes as complex as the one you're replacing. There are reasons S3 does all these things. ACLs, for example? How do you control who can access a file you uploaded? Also, it costs about 20 ti…
All in all, I had the impression that while a lot of things are WIP, Wayland had taken a more holistic approach because it was able to learn from X11's mistakes. Has Wayland really that unexpected complexity that it's now as much a part of the problem than it is a part of the solution?
Package has no README https://www.npmjs.com/package/file0 nor links to a repo
Searching Github doesn't give anything (nor any public projects using it).
Installing the package from NPM just gives you a completely minified JS that's pretty difficult to understand https://www.npmjs.com/package/file0?activeTab=code. No need to publish minified JS to NPM imho. Actually reading/stepping through dependencies is always exceptionally valuable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is classic feature bloat of a product that's been around for a while. Some customer wants a really niche feature so product adds a new option for it. It's just one new option so the experience isn't that different. Rinse and repeat hundreds of times and nobody stops the think of the cumulative effect on the 99% of customers who don't need those features.
This is true for all of Amazon's products. They enshitified everything by being beholden to never-ending customer requests for more fine knobs. Their products have a serious "let's just bolt this on" vibe. There is no theme or reason to it. AWS went from "just push a couple of buttons and you are running in the cloud without a dedicated sys admin" to "you are going to have to hire a team of cloud admins because no on…
I like the part where you bulked up the S3 part unnecessarily and hid the extra stuff you needed for yours that S3 doesn’t need. Sorry, but your code examples are a flat out lie.
I kinda like how familiar the api is, is this R2 under the hood?
I am old enough that I still remember people including myself being perplexed why s3 didn't ship with an FTP adapter. They FINALLY added the option in 2020, 14 years late. I do think the storage "space" could use some disruption. I use s3 every day at work, and my general feeling is that the entire permission system is more complicated than 99% of apps actually need, to the point of being dangerous; I think the compl…
This is classic feature bloat of a product that's been around for a while. Some customer wants a really niche feature so product adds a new option for it. It's just one new option so the experience isn't that different. Rinse and repeat hundreds of times and nobody stops the think of the cumulative effect on the 99% of customers who don't need those features.
Does it cost anything to not use features you do not need?
Last time I checked, all the so-called niche features were stashed in hierarchical option lists, outside of the happy path. You need to purposely want to dig into, say, file access, bucket access metrics, storage strategies, object versioning, etc to actually get to them.
Where's the documentation? I just see pricing and modals trying to get me to sign up.