41–50 of 126 posts
> Site.js is now the easiest way to set up and run your own Owncast instance. This will install Owncast, set it up as a systemd service, and serve it securely at your hostname. Unfortunately, 99.99% of people this is meant for, that are currently users of big web, have no idea what the two previous sentences mean.
Probably the same sentiment as many of the comments already present, but I haven't read all of them. Don't people understand that the original Internet was/is built for exactly this(?); end to end connectivity between any two hosts. This is still mostly possible, but you do now have to get a public/routable ipv4 address. IPv6 gets back to the E2E ideal, without any overlay. P2P systems from 20 years ago also solved t…
> P2P systems from 20 years ago also solved this problem. For example hidden services on Tor, i2p, generic DHTs, etc.
In addition it's easier than ever to get static IPv4 services or to setup a tiny VPS whose sole purpose is to offer a static IPv4 that routes traffic from/to computers on your LAN. Other than Tor hidden services, there's also tons of other internet software out there old and new for network connected devices to share messages like Email, Usenet, Bitmessage, UUCP, NNCP, Secure Scuttlebutt, IPFS, DAT, nostr, etc, etc.
The Big Web has “users” – a term Silicon Valley has borrowed from drug dealers to describe the people they addict to their services and exploit. This doesn't seem like it's true. I feel like it came from the unix culture. Unless they got it from drug dealers...
Well the drug dealers were certainly there first, etymonline.com has this to say of "user": Of narcotics, from 1935; of computers, from 1967." I am struggling to find a source for who first called users "users" back in 1967 - Actually I see it being used in the 1965 "Multics" papers [0] and the 1964 article in The Atlantic "Computers of Tomorrow" [1], as if it was already a term-of-art. [0] https://multicians.org/his…
1950 Science 112 732/1 Analog machines..are enthusiastically supported by their users.
1959 E. M. McCormick Digital Computer Primer x. 139 The number of instructions which can be executed by a computer represents a compromise between the designer's and user's requirements.
I don't think advocating people make their entire website out of javascript, a very "big web" requirement, is smart. It just seems like they're doing so to promote their particular npm based product and cause centralization in it. No. Small web is your own server, yes, but also your own HTML. Small web is when a webpage is a webpage and not an application that is impenetrably dense and non-modular and frankly too com…
Yeah, and there's no cookies, privacy policies, legal terms, and so forth. There's just your web page. Simple and clean.
It’s nice to think they all cl appeared together as symptoms of Big Web but the truth is, the very early web that was built on trust and collaboration only lasted a blink of an eye before the bs starts to creep in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Users" was a common term for people at PCs in my early networking days (Novell, early '90s), so it's actually much older than the Web. We made jokes about it being the same term used for junkies, but we certainly never meant it in that context. The people who were "addicted" were the ones running the network; the users were happy to leave it all at the end of the day.
Back when computers were just a piece o your life. Video games the same. It was a corner in your room. Now it's both center an floor.
That's part of why the metaverse is such dystopian bullshit. Like I need my entire field of view taken away too, so Lord Zuck can sell more ads? Ew, gross, no.
The Big Web has “users” – a term Silicon Valley has borrowed from drug dealers to describe the people they addict to their services and exploit. This doesn't seem like it's true. I feel like it came from the unix culture. Unless they got it from drug dealers...
151 "user" jargon "The Jargon File (version 4.4.7, 29 Dec 2003)"
user
n.
2. A programmer who will believe anything you tell him. One who asks silly questions. [GLS observes: This is slightly unfair. It is true that users ask questions (of necessity). Sometimes they are thoughtful or deep. Very often they are annoying or downright stupid, apparently because the user failed to think for two seconds or look in the documentation before bothering the maintainer.] See {luser}.
3. Someone who uses a program from the outside, however skillfully, without getting into the internals of the program. One who reports bugs instead of just going ahead and fixing them.
The general theory behind this term is that there are two classes of people who work with a program: there are implementors (hackers) and {luser}s. The users are looked down on by hackers to some extent because they don't understand the full ramifications of the system in all its glory. (The few users who do are known as real winners.) The term is a relative one: a skilled hacker may be a user with respect to some program he himself does not hack. A LISP hacker might be one who maintains LISP or one who uses LISP (but with the skill of a hacker). A LISP user is one who uses LISP, whether skillfully or not. Thus there is some overlap between the two terms; the subtle distinctions must be resolved by context.
.
151 "user" foldoc "The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (30 December 2018)"
user
Users are looked down on by {hackers} to some extent because they don't understand the full ramifications of the system in all its glory. The term is relative: a skilled hacker may be a user with respect to some program he himself does not hack. A LISP hacker might be one who maintains LISP or one who uses LISP (but with the skill of a hacker). A LISP user is one who uses LISP, whether skillfully or not. Thus there is some overlap between the two terms; the subtle distinctions must be resolved by context.
2. Any person, organisation, process, device, program, {protocol}, or system which uses a service provided by others.
The term "{client}" (as in "{client-server}" systems) is rather more specific, usually implying two processes communicating via some protocol.
[{Jargon File}]
(1996-04-28)
.I generally agree with this article, but ... Small Web applications and sites are single tenant. That means that one server hosts one application that serves just one person: you. I feel like people forgot that shared hosting exists (e.g. Dreamhost, or Nearly Free Speech). One computer can serve tons of websites! It can serve multiple Hacker News spikes at once. And the site doesn't even need to be in a virtual machi…
The Big Web has “users” – a term Silicon Valley has borrowed from drug dealers to describe the people they addict to their services and exploit. This doesn't seem like it's true. I feel like it came from the unix culture. Unless they got it from drug dealers...
There’s a lot of ideology in that article that I find appealing… but then they tie it to specific tech in a way that doesn’t make sense.