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

Run Your Own Website

zacs.site

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 160 posts

Re: Run Your Own Website

#101

Post by verisimilitudes »

I can see why this article with a very basic premise is so popular.

* It's short, so the average reader here has enough attention span for it.

* It's obvious, so that leaves plenty of room for patting oneself on the back.

* It's simple, so one can reference their own writings about a similar topic or related to it in some way.

* It's about a topic that lets the commenter here show off their own website and bloviate about themselves.

This is nothing against the author, but against Hacker News and how so much interesting material fails to ever reach the front page.

Re: Run Your Own Website

#102

Post by pletnes »

ilogik wrote: post #38
superkuh wrote: post #33

Yup. People tend to assume running your own site is difficult but running a static webserver is dead simple. As long as you don't involve all the unneeded dynamic language and database it's secure and doesn't really need updating all the time either. 90% of people can run a static web server on their home connection and it would fulfill their every requirement (as well as solving almost all 'problems' that exist on t…

You don't even need a home server, something like netlify or surge.sh makes it dead-simple.

If you’re a coder, what about github pages?

Re: Run Your Own Website

#103

Post by rolph »

coldpie wrote: post #36
llao wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI your font-size is uncomfortably huge, I can see maybe 25 lines of text on my desktop screen. It feels like I should step backward a meter or two.

Enormous fonts is a trend in modern web design for some reason. I browse most sites at about 66% zoom. Get used to the Ctrl+- shortcut.

My personal page has a front end font size range in 30s and 40s.

ive done that because mobile reading the page would see microdots instead of characters at 14 pt font.

i read and access at the ass end, the front is for mobies i havnt wanted to use JS to check and set font as i really dont want to build a JS site.

Re: Run Your Own Website

#104

Post by pbhjpbhj »

cannonedhamster wrote: post #42
Invictus0 wrote: post #27

This type of post makes it to the front page pretty frequently, but I think the audience on hacker News vastly underestimates the difficulty of setting up a personal site for the general public. There is always the refrain of "but just use static HTML!", as if anyone even knows what that is, as if it's so easy to set up a domain and hosting, as if no one even wants a nicely designed site with images and JavaScript th…

So for most people that are in the situation you describe I'd say they would probably just spin up a WordPress instance, pick a theme they like, and start posting. A static html site? Even easier. There are tons of services out there that will let you host your own content for very little money or even free. You can set up a static site on a platform like 1mb.com for next to nothing and edit the html, css, etc. To yo…

I've not written a site from scratch in a few years (3 or 4) until recently, CSS has got a lot more complex (and yet also slightly easier as most of the core is the same across 98% of in-use browsers).

I hadn't done flexbox or css grid, didn't know what rem was, hadn't used calc(), or media queries that target based on viewport size.

Just spin-up a Wordpress instance sounds easy but most people will need/want a few plugins and things start getting complicated fast.

Before long you're handling passing special headers by modifying .htaccess and looking at Leaflet.js source code ... just to stick up a simple WordPress site.

And you still missed a million 'basics' like resizing media appropriately and adding aria-labels, and your site is not SEO friendly, and you didn't handle backups yet, ...

Re: Run Your Own Website

#105

Post by kyshoc »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #77
icebraining wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you just want to distribute content, you're better off sharing bittorrent links. The problem is that those podcasters want the visibility and the ad money of those platforms. Which is valid, but not something that is solvable by self-hosting at home.

We need to transition to solutions for it though, and a "hybrid" approach would be a move in the right direction. i.e. you don't have to leave the platforms, just make your own website, too . Yeah, it's more work, but nothing good will come of just leaving it to the big players and what they come up with. To even have leverage, people can't just be completely dependent, that's a non-starter.

IndieWeb calls this "Publish (on your) Own Site, Syndicate Everywhere"[0].

[0]: https://indieweb.org/POSSE

Re: Run Your Own Website

#106

Post by rolph »

a1369209993 wrote: post #92
dwheeler wrote: post #29

At least own your domain name and be able to easily move your website content to whereever you want. I think for most people it's cheaper and more convenient to use a hosting service, and that's fine... as long as you can change hosting services. I've had my personal site ( https://dwheeler.com ) since 1999. As noted in https://dwheeler.com/aboutsite.html my site has been hosted on 4 different systems, and I'm sure t…

> At least own your domain name Serious question: How? Aside from .onion[0], all TLDs I know of only allow you to rent a domain name, and will take it away if you don't keep paying their protection racket year-on-year. I would be happy to pay >1000$ to purchase a (human-readable, second-level, etc) domain, if I could actually find where to do so. 0: which is less "own" and more "conjure out of the platonic ether some…

try out freedns.afraid.org there is a small fee for a premium private account, or you can ride on supermans cape for free and make a secondary domain on those who choose to make thier domain public.

Re: Run Your Own Website

#107

Post by rolph »

icebraining wrote: post #55
originalvichy wrote: post #7

The title made me hope for a quite literal way to run your website: using some kind of energy harvesting (bicycle?) used to power a small computer with a web server. This is an issue that is quite simple to solve. Many podcasters (espescially Joe Rogan) like to talk about being afraid of getting removed from a platform without having your own hosting set up. Most of the controversial big names of youtube and other pl…

If you just want to distribute content, you're better off sharing bittorrent links. The problem is that those podcasters want the visibility and the ad money of those platforms. Which is valid, but not something that is solvable by self-hosting at home.

back in the days of BBS we would mail check money order or bravely a greeting card and cash to the POB as requested.

now that we have some crypto$ scheme, the prooblem is how to transform bitcoin into physical assets vice versa.

Re: Run Your Own Website

#109

Post by skummetmaelk »

okaleniuk wrote: post #10

I do run my own site. Moreover, I do all the coding, styling, and layout manually and without any 3rd-party libraries or frameworks. Or even in-house libraries for that matter. This works for me in terms of freedom. I can do interactive plots, quizzes, games and all kind of programmable things I can imagine. No restrictions. In fact, I left Medium because I was restricted to text and images only. I want more. I want…

Your website is super cool, thank you for publishing the source on github. Would you mind elaborating on your creation flow for new pages?

Re: Run Your Own Website

#110

Post by sequoia »

verisimilitudes wrote: post #101

I can see why this article with a very basic premise is so popular. * It's short, so the average reader here has enough attention span for it. * It's obvious, so that leaves plenty of room for patting oneself on the back. * It's simple, so one can reference their own writings about a similar topic or related to it in some way. * It's about a topic that lets the commenter here show off their own website and bloviate a…

Agreed: I struggle to understand why this is considered a useful post to a broad audience of people who all already know what a static site generator is.

I will offer one critique of the article itself: the repeated (often many times within one sentence) self referential linking is tedious and makes reading difficult. Am I supposed to read 4 different articles before I get to the end of one sentence in this one, or is this just some SEO voodoo?

Post reply on HN