21–30 of 104 posts
I like this. Speaks to my own goal of creating "micro" communities. https://micro.mu . We limit groups to 20 people. I think that's an ideal number for real connections. Need more, it's likely for a different type of communication.
What's with the sudden influx of "smol" things? Is this related to "smol" ML / "smol" AI models, and/or the HN user that (IIRC) is associated with them and likes to use the word "smol" in their comments?
What's with the sudden influx of "smol" things? Is this related to "smol" ML / "smol" AI models, and/or the HN user that (IIRC) is associated with them and likes to use the word "smol" in their comments?
And it's been brewing there for a few years now, and the word's escaping into more contexts.
What's with the sudden influx of "smol" things? Is this related to "smol" ML / "smol" AI models, and/or the HN user that (IIRC) is associated with them and likes to use the word "smol" in their comments?
I like this. Speaks to my own goal of creating "micro" communities. https://micro.mu . We limit groups to 20 people. I think that's an ideal number for real connections. Need more, it's likely for a different type of communication.
How does this compare to a small discord server? What can it do better?
I'm a big fan of self-hosting, especially things that I can run inside my home with no internet-facing ports. But anything that will be outward facing has to be sandboxed from everything else, kept up to date, and monitored for intrusions. It can be daunting unless you definitely have time to stay on top of it. I'm curious if any self-hosters have thoughts about this.
That then did a 180 from being platforms and started with "content creators"?
I like this. Speaks to my own goal of creating "micro" communities. https://micro.mu . We limit groups to 20 people. I think that's an ideal number for real connections. Need more, it's likely for a different type of communication.
Trying to use this, I get an error when entering a group. Seems like a cool idea, but it needs to have a lot more functionality to draw me in, I think.
So like a normal website as they always were before all those web 2.0 platforms? That then did a 180 from being platforms and started with "content creators"?
If web 2.0 was the introduction of comment systems, and turned each web page into a performance upon a stage, with a goal of audience participation / loudness / re-sharing, and content creating being the evolution of publication to hustling... I think lots of people would be satisfied by a local internet of people they trust, to share ideas in a non-commercial, private, 'safe' way.
But the real magic to me would be not worrying about it being hacked, or deployed, or monitored, or any of the pollutant infrastructure that we got good at, that unfortunately makes everything operational and robust.
One thing I've worried about with self-hosting small (or smol) services is that I'm responsible for securing them against attackers. Even if my circle is 15 people using a particular service, potentially thousands of malicious actors will be poking at it over the months and years I'm running it. I'm a big fan of self-hosting, especially things that I can run inside my home with no internet-facing ports. But anything…