Live data from Hacker News

A simple web we own

rsdoiel.github.io

111–120 of 240 posts

Re: A simple web we own

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spot the American. Capitalism is not the only way of life, and FYGM is a mental illness outside of the US

What is you preferred socioeconomic system? Any countries successfully implementing it so we can copy them?

Capitalism does not imply FYGM, nor does it benefit from it.

Re: A simple web we own

#112
post #100

I am in the process of co-founding a new protocol which creates a decentralized root of trust using normal plain-text names (i.e. `foo.bar`). One of the goals I hope to obtain is allowing domain-style lookups of private websites hosted on P2P networks. It's lofty, but the dialog used by OP is _very_ close to why I think it's necessary.

I've been interested in doing something similar in the past, but I could really never solve issues like domain squatting and stopping individuals from claiming every name possible. Do you have a place where you keep these plans or have discussions around it? Or even just a place where I could get updates if anything does come of it?

> I've been interested in doing something similar in the past, but I could really never solve issues like domain squatting and stopping individuals from claiming every name possible

I think that's just a property of a naming system. Without something like a centralized threat of force that can know every person participating in the system - there really is no recourse. The approach we are taking is making it difficult to create a speculative market around names which seems to be the driving force behind squatters.

Happy to discuss it in more detail: hackernews@sepositus.com

(Note: that's an alias that goes to my email address which I avoid putting in public places for obvious reasons).

Re: A simple web we own

#113

I am in the process of co-founding a new protocol which creates a decentralized root of trust using normal plain-text names (i.e. `foo.bar`). One of the goals I hope to obtain is allowing domain-style lookups of private websites hosted on P2P networks. It's lofty, but the dialog used by OP is _very_ close to why I think it's necessary.

Have you considered improving ygddrasil or something similar.

Yes, the protocol is going to be open and the plan is to submit PRs to various projects when we're at that point. It's not really an "either or" with ygddrasil but more like a "both and."

Re: A simple web we own

#114

I remember a web when practically every ISP allowed you to have a "home page" hosted with them. Your home page was situated in the "public_html" directory of your home directory on their server — hence the name. Then the URL was http://www. /~ I haven't see an URL with a tilde ('~') in it in a long time. Why did ISPs stop with this service? Was it to curb illegal file sharing?

The ironic thing is that each subscriber now has a dedicated computer many times more powerful than what ISPs had back in the day for hosting ALL those websites sitting in the most privileged part of their network, being online 24h and begging to be used for small hosting tasks like this: their ISP provided router. It even serves it's configuration panel through html and a webserver for crying out loud!

Unfortunately reality is such that those are closed systems with historically abhorrent security and ISPs usually forbids the user from properly providing their own choice of router.

Re: A simple web we own

#115
post #72

As someone who is roughly in the same age group as the author and who was running a BBS, has witnessed the rise of IP4 networks, HTTP, Mosaic etc. let me provide a counter-point. The democratization ends at your router. Unless you are willing to lay down your own wires - which for legal reasons you most likely won't be able to do, we will hopelessly be dependent on the ISP. (Radio on free frequencies is possible and…

This is just the "No True Scotsman" fallacy (with a dash of "appeal to tradition" fallacy). Yes, the internet has never been perfect, but it was really good for most users a long time and has only lost freedom for the majority of users recently with the rise of coordinated multi-state online censorship. Yes, there have been problems in the past, but if you can't compare now to then and see that things have radically shifted, I don't know what else to say to convince you.

Re: A simple web we own

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In short: there's no hope of getting a world-wide, free, uncensored, unlimited IP4/6 network back. We never had it in the first place. We can build such a society. I am not sure why you think this is never possible. People can work for a better world. That sometimes works, too.

> People can work for a better world. That sometimes works, too. Not when people make arguments based on dreams, hope, and optimism. If somebody tells me that we can build a shed, I want them to talk about wood, nails and concrete, or to stop talking.

But you don't necessarily need wood, nails or concrete to build a shed. Once we start specifying things like that we stop considering alternatives that could be legitimate options.

Re: A simple web we own

#117
post #4

> I publish this site via GitHub Pages service for public Internet access A whole post about not needing big corporations to publish things online, and then they use Microsoft to publish this thing online...

But Github's publishing is at least _highly_ portable. You could move the same web site to a vanilla nginx setup on some random domain.

The nice part here is that you can update your site via git version control, and have easy rollback etc... assuming you can deal with git.

I don't think it's such a problem to have big corporations involved in your publishing efforts; the problem is when they lock users in with proprietary technology, and create barriers to entry like high costs and technical complexity.

I don't have a need to mix anticapitalist fervor with the desire for an easy way to make durable, portable web sites. The internet has always involved paying some kind of piper. Corporations are too big & monopolization is a problem, but one thing at a time...

Re: A simple web we own

#118
post #72

As someone who is roughly in the same age group as the author and who was running a BBS, has witnessed the rise of IP4 networks, HTTP, Mosaic etc. let me provide a counter-point. The democratization ends at your router. Unless you are willing to lay down your own wires - which for legal reasons you most likely won't be able to do, we will hopelessly be dependent on the ISP. (Radio on free frequencies is possible and…

>The democratization ends at your router. Unless you are willing to lay down your own wires - which for legal reasons you most likely won't be able to do, we will hopelessly be dependent on the ISP. (Radio on free frequencies is possible and there are valiant attempts, they will ultimately remain niche and have severe bandwidth limitations)

I don't know - the rate of adoption of MeshCore and similar technologies is quite astonishing.

Re: A simple web we own

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spot the American. Capitalism is not the only way of life, and FYGM is a mental illness outside of the US

What is you preferred socioeconomic system? Any countries successfully implementing it so we can copy them?

Lmgtfy: Switzerland, Norway...

Re: A simple web we own

#120
post #72

As someone who is roughly in the same age group as the author and who was running a BBS, has witnessed the rise of IP4 networks, HTTP, Mosaic etc. let me provide a counter-point. The democratization ends at your router. Unless you are willing to lay down your own wires - which for legal reasons you most likely won't be able to do, we will hopelessly be dependent on the ISP. (Radio on free frequencies is possible and…

> The democratization ends at your router.

Mostly because we have allowed the ISPs to collapse into monopolies.

People have forgotten that the US used to have competition in broadband back at the point where the Internet was rolling out to everybody.

Post reply on HN