61–70 of 269 posts
whats wrong with css
CSS and styling are immoral. Styling is used to manipulate readers. Content should stand on its own, anything that looks nice should be immediately met with skepticism. What are they trying to hide with their pretty background colors and hover styles? edit: also, can we talk about unneeded bloat? Those 5kb css files add up, how many tons are coal are burned every year because of all of those CSS files being downloade…
Ah, yes, I remember this from web0: Trying to make web3 go away is just as pointless as trying to make web2 go away. It's here, it's going to stick around. Yes, there's a lot of hype, it probably won't look the same in 10 years, and yes there's a lot of charlatans, but I think ignoring its importance is myopic.
Can you post a link to a place where I can interact with some web3 content directly then?
Not an article about what web3 will be, but something I can play with? Back in the early web 2.0 this is pretty easy, just point to twitter, myspace, stumble upon etc.
I'm genuinely curious what web3 really even looks like since all the pages that talk about it mostly sound like marketing pitches without a single real thing I can interact with.
Web 1.0: HTML Web 2.0: HTML + Javascript Web 3.0: HTML + Javascript + Ponzi. source: https://twitter.com/jeremiahg/status/1473768877377130505
Be very sceptical, but don't ignore the whole thing or you might end up missing the next real wave of innovation in tech (which is what i thought HN was about).
I wrote my first grad student website in raw HTML. In Vi, on a Unix mainframe, over SSH. It was fun, but I don't blame developers for trying to make things more composable and reusable. I'm big on tools that let you build plain static HTML pages, but rendered from templated components.
> ...a Unix mainframe... ???
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, the Web is supposed to be decentralized from Web 1.0, right? Or is this wrong?
It's supposed to be, and it is . Every domain points to a different node in the decentralized web. Just because some nodes are massively popular doesn't mean the technology is not decentralized. Popular nodes will always exist in every decentralized vision of the internet.
It's funny that web3 is being sold as the decentralized web when that's what the internet architecture was literally designed for -- to survive an apocalyptic nuclear war. However, big players used their ability to purchase infrastructure and unforeseen flaws in the protocols to centralize much of the activity on the web. Lol if you think money can't do that to any decentralized architecture. One thing that would at…
It's both pleasing and a little disappointing to see this being "marketed" under the name "web0" --- especially on a "nonstandard" TLD. All websites used to be simple handwritten hyperlinked pages. I guess what's old is new again? Of course, Big Tech would want you to use its browser (not browser_s_) and indulge in the insane complexity of "the web stack" which guarantees its monopoly, but it doesn't have to be that…
I guess that's a dig but I'm not sure why. It's resolvable via the ICANN root and is no more "nonstandard" than any of its siblings.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it requires expert knowledge
layout sure but font-size and background are pretty straight forward if you can set up a web server i am sure you could figure out enough to qualify for web 1.0 level complexity if simplicity is the concern why not just host a text file? browsers format them nicely
I am deeply saddened by the current state of affairs in the web today. in Javascript right now there are so many layers upon layers upon layers of DSLs and mannerisms on top of questionable language features which 'must be used' because the former language features are not cool anymore since a few days ago. The whole ecosystem is turning into a meme of itself.
In a few months someone will reinvent another part of the big clusterfuck again and publish it in a shiny new website and we'll have another 3 month old Javascript framework being touted as the next earth-shattering thing that will revolutionize all things. And again. And again.
We have nice things. We have nice abstractions already. We should be working on toning down and optimizing the good stuff, the good bits that get stuff done, not ramping up on new shiny buttons for each and every edge case out there just because we need to stay on the loop (whatever this loop is).