Live data from Hacker News

Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

den.dev

191–200 of 270 posts

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#191
The author makes some good points, and the overall message is good, but:

Why would we care so much about being a property owner and not renter if we don't care about whether a hosting company can just turn us off?

Why would we care so little about privacy that we'd willingly use services that negate privacy and introduce tracking? For instance, the author suggests using Cloudflare, Azure, AWS and more, and none of these aren't abusive. Funnily enough, the Cloudflare hosted images on the page didn't even load for me;)

Does the author not know that Mastodon is software and not a social media network? Sure, it's a minor thing, but when people use terms incorrectly, it makes me wonder if they really know what they're talking about (people who'd rather fight about whether it's a term "everyone uses" instead of whether it's correct seem to not get this point).

The author writes (or quotes) somewhat derisively:

> Well of course it’s better to host your own blog! Also, while you’re at it, put your Mastodon server in a DigitalOcean droplet, throw some Cloudflare CDN in front of it, run your own Raspberry Pi to monitor uptime, and you’re golden! Oh, and don’t forget to also make sure to log into the droplet every once in a while to update the container, do an occasional database migration, and ensure that you check the logs for intrusions.

This all-or-nothing attempt to make the idea of self-hosting seem ridiculous is by itself ridiculous. Nobody needs to do all that. On the other hand, the audience for what the author is advocating shouldn't have a problem setting up a simple machine or VM instance to host a web site, blog, perhaps even DNS server themselves. All or nothing is silly, so even making this example reduces credibility.

All in all, I'd love to see people take ownership of their own things on the Internet. Nobody needs to self-host, but people should if they could, and they should ignore people who say it's too complex because most of the too-complex argument is the suggestion that it needs to be much more than it does. A single VM, a single small computer, even a Pi, can host most things.

But whether people self host or use someone else, choosing where to host matters. Don't use companies that negate the benefits of owning your own things, whether by lock-in or by letting them do all the tracking that Facebook would normally do. Don't use companies that'll disable your account because some idiot wrote a letter. Don't use companies that're so big that you can't talk to a human!

This article makes for an odd juxtaposition between doing thoughtful things and doing things that negate some or much of that thoughtfulness. I'd have a hard time recommending it to others without qualifications.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can combine two things in a way that never appeared together in the source material.

Youtube compression algorithm also produces lots of artifacts that were never filmed by the video producers

And datamoshing lets you produce effects that weren't in the source clips.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#193
post #44

> Exploiting user-generated content. You know, if I've noticed anything in the past couple years, it's that even if you self-host your own site, it's still going to get hoovered up and used/exploited by things like AI training bots. I think between everyone's code getting trained on, even if it's AGPLv3 or something similarly restrictive, and generally everything public on the internet getting "trained" and "transfor…

> even if you self-host your own site, it's still going to get hoovered up and used/exploited by things like AI training bots. I think between everyone's code getting trained on, even if it's AGPLv3 or something similarly restrictive, and generally everything public on the internet getting "trained" and "transformed" to basically launder it via "AI", I can absolutely see why someone rational would want to share a who…

> The society works best when people don't capture all the fruits of their labor for themselves.

Sure, but it sounds like you think people shouldn't be upset about businesses trying to capture all the fruits of people's labor, too.

Capitalism is evil, and people thinking that normalizing exploitation is OK is either shortsighted or it's also evil. Are you simply unaware that this is what's happening and what people are upset about? Have you never thought about it? Or do you want businesses to succeed in exploiting people's work? It sounds like it, because you wrote, "that's how it supposed to work".

I truly wonder if you're self-aware, or if you just think that you'll one day be on the side of the exploiters.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#194
post #44

> Exploiting user-generated content. You know, if I've noticed anything in the past couple years, it's that even if you self-host your own site, it's still going to get hoovered up and used/exploited by things like AI training bots. I think between everyone's code getting trained on, even if it's AGPLv3 or something similarly restrictive, and generally everything public on the internet getting "trained" and "transfor…

> used/exploited by things like AI training bots How is this worse than a human reading your blog/code, remembering the key parts of it, and creating something transformative from it?

One of the--admittedly many--things that puts me off AI is the pitch starts off as "you will have abilities you never had before and probably never would have had, be excited", then when critics are like, "woof it's a little worrying you can , , , etc.", the pitch switches to "you could always have done this, calm down".

The whole point of software engineering is to do stuff faster than you could before. It is THE feature. We could already add, we could already FMA, we could already do matrix math, etc. etc. Doing it billions of times faster than we could before at far less energy expenditure--even including what it takes to build and deliver computers--has led to an explosion of productivity, discovery, and prosperity. Scale is the point. It changes everything and we know it; we shouldn't pretend otherwise.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#196
post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the sentiment was to keep your content (and audience) portable, not specifically that you don't rely on anyone else's services. If you post everything on Twitter and Twitter decides they don't like you, then that's the end of you. If you host on a personal domain and your rented web host decides to block you, there's plenty more options and you can take your audience with you and they will never know the diff…

I know it was, but the click-baity headline makes it seem like you're becoming independent of the whims of private companies, which you are very much not if you're renting a host somewhere. You're definitely not a property owner, you might be a domain owner (renter still, I don't know of any domains which you can pay for and keep forever).

As long as the services you're renting are commoditizated, you are independent of their whims.

You can easily replace a VPS provider with a different provider that will give you exactly the same service. You can't replace Facebook with a different Facebook.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#197
post #103

This article recommends .eu domains. There is a caveat to this, in the unlikely event your state leaves the EU you will be forced off, this happened to many UK entities after Brexit, they were forced to stop using their .eu domains.

Furthermore, as a French person, and thus a European citizen, I must say that the .eu TLD is not popular and usually bears a _political_ meaning.

Like it's used by institutions or organizations linked to the EU by their activity, but it's rarely used by companies or individuals whose activity is not focussed on the EU.

Companies are still going to buy the .eu domains associated with their brands, but they will communicate with another TLD like .com or will provide located versions of their site under a country TLD like .fr for the French version and .de for the German one.

What I see the most is:

- country TLD for content that is located

- .com/.net or weird (like .dev) for content that is in English or in multiple languages

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#198
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a fair call-out, but that's why in the post I mention this: > Most people are perfectly content with everything living inside their Facebook account because it’s convenient and their family and friends are already there. Telling everyone to learn how git and GitHub Pages work to host their blog is not an effective way to drive change. But that’s also not the point. As I mentioned earlier, the goal is to start…

What I don't understand is why you would think that GitHub Pages is an acceptable alternative : it's kind of the equivalent of being a doctor and recommending Oxycodone to cure hangover for someone of alcoholic tendencies...

Because you can get your own domain in front of it and export your content (i.e. Markdown). Users would land on your domain name, but it doesn't really matter if it's hosted on your PC or GitHub. The point is that you would be able to change providers very easily without having to make people migrate to your new platform.

Re: Be a property owner and not a renter on the internet

#200
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In fact, I never consented for anyone to access my server. Just because it has an IP address, does not make it a public service. If you don't take any steps to make it clear that it's not public, like an auth wall or putting pages on unguessable paths, then it is public, because that is what everyone expects. Just like you if you have a storefront, if the door is unlocked you'd expect people to just come in and no…

Your shop might be open sure - but aren't we talking about people coming in and taking whatever they like for free? ie if you were an art gallery, the expectation would be people could come in and look, but you don't expect them to come in, photograph everything and then sell prints of everything online.

That's not what's happening.

Instead, it's that there's some people coming into your gallery, studying the art and its style, and leaving with the learned information. They then replicate that style in their own gallery. Of course, none of the images are copies, or would be judged to be copies by a reasonable person.

So now you, the gallery owner, want to forbid just those people who would come to learn the style. But you still want people to come and admire the art, and may be buy a print.

Post reply on HN