Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Splitting the Web

ploum.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 201 posts

Re: Splitting the Web

#161

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #105
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mostly agree, but I do think we owe it to the normies to make our part of the web approachable. I don't want to feel like we've fed them to the machine when maybe they wanted out and didn't know how.

> I mostly agree, but I do think we owe it to the normies to make our part of the web approachable. You owe nothing to these traitors who actively sabotage the goals that you deem important.

They're victims of capitalism gone-astray, not traitors. If we abandon them we'll only have each other to talk to. I don't like us enough to do that.

Besides, we have to deal with the consequences of their votes, so it's in our interests to oppose whoever would manipulate them because those manipulators are threats to things that we care about. Things like privacy, and the ability to control the devices that we "own" in ways that contradict the vendor's wishes.

Re: Splitting the Web

#162

Post by GMoromisato »

flir wrote: post #157
GMoromisato wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apologies--still working on everything (which is why I didn't post the URL). But here's a technical description: 1. Imagine we build a platform abstraction layer on top of the typical nodes of a datacenter: web servers, database storage, etc. 2. We also create a remoted UI layer on the platform that renders on browser clients as HTML/JavaScript. Think of it like X Windows but higher-level and rendered on a browser. 3…

Actually, I have a question. Why not just any old container on the back-end, and mostly focus on the protocol between the web browser and the backend? Why are you bothering to build an abstraction layer between the cloud service provider and your VM?

A couple of reasons:

1. I want developers to have a unified, integrated API. For example, the UI controls can connect to a database object and get data change notifications. That makes it easy to, e.g., show a table control that updates when rows change.

2. I want to (eventually) handle data and processing that exceeds a single node's capacity. For example, a map function over an array should automatically be distributed over as many cores/machines as needed. In a sense, the program should be able to tap into as many resources as it needs/can afford without special code.

Of course, I could have done both of those things in different ways, without a unified platform layer, but where's the fun in that?

I wrote a bit about it here: https://medium.com/@gridwhale/rise-of-the-hyperplatforms-d4a...

Re: Splitting the Web

#163

Post by wilsonnb3 »

zzo38computer wrote: post #119
wilsonnb3 wrote: post #25

> It feels like everyone is now choosing its side. You can’t stay in the middle anymore. You are either dedicating all your CPU cycles to run JavaScript tracking you or walking away from the big monopolies. You are either being paid to build huge advertising billboards on top of yet another framework or you are handcrafting HTML. This is only true because the UX of mastodon, Gemini, GrapheneOS, and other darlings of…

Gemini does not have UX, so it isn't "bad". That is better than having bad UX. Some client software might have bad UX, but that depends which client software you are using.

It doesn't have a UI but it definitely has a UX - TLS required, no embedded images or videos, very basic support for user input, etc.

Theoretically a client could choose to ignore some of that but it's not really a Gemini client anymore.

Straight from the FAQ, emphasis mine:

> Rather than trying to decide whether Gemini is about turning the clock forward or backwards, it's better to think of it as trying to deliver a particular online user experience that its fans think of as not being old fashioned, out of date, or obsolete, but not modern, cutting edge, or innovative either.

Re: Splitting the Web

#164

Post by dreamcompiler »

Dalewyn wrote: post #104
skydhash wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m moving to Firefox as my main browser, and the amount of sites that break because of me blocking JavaScript (with ublock) is staggering. I can understand SPA being JS only, but simple blogs and other content sites, no.

You clearly haven't seen the sites that demand JavaShit just to load JPGs and PNGs that you told the browser to open directly. As in pointing the browser at a JPG or PNG and getting redirected to a page with JavaShit to load that JPG or PNG. Why? Fuck if I know, I don't live in the same universe as whoever wrote and published that literal garbage.

A lot of paywalled websites won't throw up a nag screen and will let you read the whole article if you turn off javascript. You won't see the pictures (probably because they want to discourage people from turning off JS) but that's fine with me.

Re: Splitting the Web

#165

Post by sydbarrett74 »

What pisses me off is that the Powers That Be (both government and Big Business) are requiring that we keep purchasing ever beefier hardware to run all the trackers that get shoved down our throats. We're paying to be surveilled.

Re: Splitting the Web

#166

Post by shaunxcode »

npongratz wrote: post #14
beeburrt wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Door game?

Not GP, but probably referring to door games similar to those found on BBSes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBS_door#Door_games

Yep, exactly. The whole fediverse thing very much feels like a new iteration of BBS (which is a great thing!) and a big part of that was async/turn based games (often times you were restricted to 5-10 moves/actions per day). The great thing about it was it meant you spent more time thinking about your moves as you went about your normal day than being glued to your screen.

Re: Splitting the Web

#167

Post by seabass-labrax »

zzo38computer wrote: post #124
seabass-labrax wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mastodon is fully usable without any JavaScript at all; there are a number of 'client' applications that you can install entirely locally[1]. If you're using the 'normal' Web interface to Mastodon, you'll only ever need to run JavaScript from the server you registered for, even if you read posts from other servers. [1]: https://joinmastodon.org/apps

OK, but there are many instances and you should be able to somehow make it automatically work with all of them when you access the URL (even in browsers that somehow do not render HTML). You could use but that only specifies that it is using Activty Stream and not that it is using Mastodon.

Absolutely - your browser should ideally handle it for you and offer to open any Mastodon link in the client of your choice. However, my comment was to indicate that this isn't an inherent issue with Mastodon or ActivityPub.

It's just a 'plumbing' issue, a matter of the rest of the Web ecosystem catching up with the rapid pace of the Fediverse's development.

Re: Splitting the Web

#168

Post by pmlnr »

johnnyworker wrote: post #34

How about a web ring? A manifesto? A good name for it, or several? By that I mean things to make this distributed discontent more discoverable, and more importantly, all those neat little tools and protocols that achieve great things with a fraction of the resources while keeping the autonomy of the user intact. We also need (more, discoverable) beginner level material that explains the beauty and potential of the we…

> How about a web ring? A manifesto? A good name for it, or several?

Yup, doesn't work either: https://suboptimalism.neocities.org/writings/yesterweb

Re: Splitting the Web

#169

Post by butz »

reidrac wrote: post #131
butz wrote: post #22

Biggest issue will be to keep government and public services on the non-corporate web, as they probably jump ship for "security" reasons.

I hate when a official government organisation that has their own website still uses twitter and facebook to make important announcements. The assumption all citizens use those private services is wrong and dangerous.

Yes, this. Of course, there are no alternatives. EU could probably promote some instance of Mastodon as mandatory.

Re: Splitting the Web

#170

Post by JohnFen »

julianeon wrote: post #91

To me it seems dangerous to go to the author's side of the split, if you work in tech: you won't be exposed, at all, to the web that most people experience. Which is bad for you, professionally speaking - it's bad to be completely in the dark about "the web" as most people experience it. It's bad if you work in a startup which is on that web. And it's bad if you're entrepreneurial and would like to make money off tha…

> Which is bad for you, professionally speaking - it's bad to be completely in the dark about "the web" as most people experience it.

Why? None of my professional work is related to the web at all. Why should I have to suffer the hell that is the modern web just because most people choose otherwise? Doing so wouldn't improve my work at all.

Post reply on HN