21–30 of 167 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I knew that. I would have liked to obtain my personal top-level domain, but it seems complicated to me.
It's not possible. But there are more and less neutral ones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not possible. But there are more and less neutral ones.
I'm asking you out of pure curiosity, it's not an attack: what difference does it make to have a domain controlled by Google versus a more general one?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not possible. But there are more and less neutral ones.
I'm asking you out of pure curiosity, it's not an attack: what difference does it make to have a domain controlled by Google versus a more general one?
Also, many people (apparently not you) are uncomfortable giving money to Google.
Google also ends up with some limited information about who is accessing your website.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm asking you out of pure curiosity, it's not an attack: what difference does it make to have a domain controlled by Google versus a more general one?
Who is 'he'? Did you use an LLM for translation, and it used he instead of I?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm asking you out of pure curiosity, it's not an attack: what difference does it make to have a domain controlled by Google versus a more general one?
If Google doesn't like you, it can remove your domain. Also, many people (apparently not you) are uncomfortable giving money to Google. Google also ends up with some limited information about who is accessing your website.
Update: I see you've edited the comment. Regarding paying Google, I have no problem paying for their services. I don't know what the issue is. By the way, the domain is managed by Squarespace.
How do the developers not realise that this set of protocols is completely unworkable for 90% of users?
Please stop developing systems where the engineering is front and centre. If you want to put content UX first, you need to do exactly that, with a one-click solution that gets users up and running instantly.
If you users have to go anywhere near a command line, or Docker, or they have to hand-edit HTML or CSS, you're creating walls most users aren't going to scale.
At the moment this looks more like NerdNet than IndieWeb.
If IndieWeb wants content, burying it under a ton of tech soup is the exact opposite of what they claim they want. How do the developers not realise that this set of protocols is completely unworkable for 90% of users? Please stop developing systems where the engineering is front and centre. If you want to put content UX first, you need to do exactly that, with a one-click solution that gets users up and running inst…
I think the IndieWeb is at this early stage. The adoption for a broader audience will come naturally (if this survives), but for now - let them cook
This seems different. It embraces the modern web and tries to fit in, while still giving the creator full control over their yard.
I might be overly optimistic, but I'm excited for this! I will try to make my myzopotamia.dev blog join the IndieWeb as soon as I find some time
This intrigued me a lot! I have been searching for a way to break out of the social silos, but all the other alternatives just weren't doing it for me. They usually chased thr nostalgia of the 90s for nostalgia's sake, but apart from making me nostalgic for 10 minutes I haven't found much use of them. This seems different. It embraces the modern web and tries to fit in, while still giving the creator full control ove…
If IndieWeb wants content, burying it under a ton of tech soup is the exact opposite of what they claim they want. How do the developers not realise that this set of protocols is completely unworkable for 90% of users? Please stop developing systems where the engineering is front and centre. If you want to put content UX first, you need to do exactly that, with a one-click solution that gets users up and running inst…