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

A simple web we own

rsdoiel.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 240 posts

Re: A simple web we own

#21

Post by sagaro »

I agree with the point that big companies have persuaded people that only they can offer ease of publishing content. most of my friends publish on Facebook, X, Instagram etc.

I have tried to get them to publish markdown sites using GitHub pages, but the pain of having to git commit and do it via desktop was the blocker.

So I recently made them a mobile app called JekyllPress [0] with which they can publish their posts similar to WordPress mobile app. And now a bunch of them regularly publish on GitHub pages. I think with more tools to simplify the publishing process, more people will start using GitHub pages (my app still requires some painful onboarding like creating a repo, enabling GitHub pages and getting PAT, no oAuth as I don't have any server).

[0] https://www.gapp.in/projects/jekyllpress/

Re: A simple web we own

#22

Post by IFC_LLC »

I mean, you do have a point, and I'll quite agree with it. The only way of monetizing your writing is to use Substack or Medium, or whatever.

Yet your approach is appallingly low on the other side of the spectrum. I've been in IT for the past 25 years. I have yet to see a non-IT person who knows what dedicated IP is. If you are not publishing it on the internet, then what's the point?

I've seen plenty of companies where the owner just had a read-only shared drive, where people can rummage thru a pack of PDFs. This' was all fine with that.

You have to understand, manage and work with the complexities of the tools, and offer tools quite enough for the task. It's alright to offer what you do to an engineer who has a spare Pi and a couple of days to kill. But it's quite useless for anyone else to adopt.

Re: A simple web we own

#23

Post by righthand »

sagaro wrote: post #21

I agree with the point that big companies have persuaded people that only they can offer ease of publishing content. most of my friends publish on Facebook, X, Instagram etc. I have tried to get them to publish markdown sites using GitHub pages, but the pain of having to git commit and do it via desktop was the blocker. So I recently made them a mobile app called JekyllPress [0] with which they can publish their post…

Isn’t publishing on Github Pages still posting to a corporate centrally owned entity and not a solution to the problem described?

Re: A simple web we own

#24

Post by caconym_ »

sowbug wrote: post #15
thefounder wrote: post #2

I think the main issue with federated apps is the identity and moderation. Without identity verification is hard to moderate so you end up with closed systems where some big CO does the moderation at an acceptable level

This is only half a thought. The current wave of AI agents is diminishing the value of identity as a DDOS or content-moderation signal. The formula until now included bot = bad, but unless your service wants to exclude everyone using OpenClaw and friends, that's no longer a valid heuristic. If identity is no longer a strong signal, then the internet must move away from CAPTCHAs and logins and reputation, and focus mo…

> if I read a thought-provoking, original, enriching comment on HN, do I really care if it was actually written by a dog?

I would rather just read the thought as it was originally expressed by a human somewhere in the AI's training data, rather than a version of it that's been laundered through AI and deployed according to the separate, hidden intent of the AI's operator.

Re: A simple web we own

#25

Post by RajT88 »

The only way we own a web of our own is to develop much more of a culture of leaving smallish machines online all the time. Imagine something like Tor or BitTorrent, but everyone has a very simple way of running their own node for content hosting.

That always-on device? To get critical mass, instead of just the nerds, you'd need it to ship with devices which are always-on, like routers/gateways, smart TV's. Then you're back to being at the mercy of centralized companies who also don't love patching their security vulnerabilities.

Re: A simple web we own

#26

Post by cousin_it »

It's not about ease of publishing. The issue is what people get in return for publishing. Until you can design a platform that gives top creators as much money+attention as commercial platforms, you'll see a drain of top creators and their viewers to commercial platforms.

Re: A simple web we own

#27

Post by themacguffinman »

I think this mostly misses the biggest reason why writers would choose big tech platforms or other big platforms: discovery and aggregation. If you want to speak to be heard and not just for its own sake, then you want to go where the people are hanging out and where they could actually find your content.

This is like talking about how book authors don't need Amazon when you have a printer and glue at home.

Re: A simple web we own

#28

Post by jejeyyy77 »

RajT88 wrote: post #25

The only way we own a web of our own is to develop much more of a culture of leaving smallish machines online all the time. Imagine something like Tor or BitTorrent, but everyone has a very simple way of running their own node for content hosting. That always-on device? To get critical mass, instead of just the nerds, you'd need it to ship with devices which are always-on, like routers/gateways, smart TV's. Then you'…

if only we all had a little device that was always on and and connected….

Re: A simple web we own

#30

Post by moffers »

It’s not really covered, but p2p technology combined with every phone in the world (and a little wishful thinking) could make for some neat applications.
Post reply on HN