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

211–220 of 240 posts

Re: A simple web we own

#211

Post by graypegg »

squeefers wrote: post #188
graypegg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point the author is trying to make is more so about these mini networks on their own LAN, which their family uses. (And maybe dreaming of a neighbourhood utility LAN as a middle ground between LAN in your house and WAN as just a trunk to a big ISP node) The full quote is - A Raspberry Pi 3B+ with a 3 gigabyte hard drive setup as a "server" (makes this site available on my home network[9]) - I publish this…

hes like these off-gridders that use iphones.... larping some kind of self-sufficieny, whilst being firmly tied to industrialised society and completely unwilling to sever the link

Yeah I think the author made a mistake framing his idea as something bigger than it is. Basically only serves to draw that conclusion if he pitches it as a fight against big tech.

But just saying people should homelab more is totally cromulent.

Re: A simple web we own

#212

Post by avmich »

beders wrote: 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…

ISP is to only transfer IP packets. All the rest is up to you. And more: if suddenly many need a lot of upload speed, both marketing and lawmaking forces are in their favor. I think you overestimate this trouble.

Re: A simple web we own

#213

Post by idiotsecant »

avmich wrote: post #212
beders wrote: 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…

ISP is to only transfer IP packets. All the rest is up to you. And more: if suddenly many need a lot of upload speed, both marketing and lawmaking forces are in their favor. I think you overestimate this trouble.

>ISP is to only transfer IP packets

This is a fine aspiration but not at all reflected in reality.

Re: A simple web we own

#214

Post by avmich »

idiotsecant wrote: post #213
avmich wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISP is to only transfer IP packets. All the rest is up to you. And more: if suddenly many need a lot of upload speed, both marketing and lawmaking forces are in their favor. I think you overestimate this trouble.

>ISP is to only transfer IP packets This is a fine aspiration but not at all reflected in reality.

Current practices aren't limits to possibilities.

Re: A simple web we own

#215

Post by thesuitonym »

squeefers wrote: post #186
shevy-java wrote: post #75

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.

who pays for it then?

Who pays for roads?

Re: A simple web we own

#216

Post by thesuitonym »

Right of the bat, first sentence already bugs me. I hate this "woe is meeee the web is centralized" nonsense. No, the WWW is not owned by big companies, you have decided to only go to web sites owned by big companies. You might be able to make the argument that the Internet is owned by a few big companies, depending on what you consider the Internet to be (Is it the physical hardware, or the content that passes through the hardware?), but the web? The World Wide Web? What are you even talking about?

Of course, I am asking bad faith questions here. I know the author is fully aware that the WWW is free and available to all. I don't assume any maliciousness here, but the author is not being honest about their intent. They know you can just put a website out there, but that's not the problem. The problem is that they won't get 2.5 million views, 100,000 interactions, and 1000 comments. They want a more open web, like it was back in the day. But then you remind them that back then having 1000 views on your entire site (let alone any single page) was considered successful, and that's not what they meant. The problem is that everyone wants to eat their cake and have it, too.

You either get a small web, where page views are counted in the hundreds, or you get locked into the big players and get the views you want. I, for one, choose the former.

Re: A simple web we own

#217

Post by intrikate »

amarant wrote: post #33
jejeyyy77 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

If I'm reading the implication right, you're having a pretty terrible idea. Glossing over what running a server would do to your battery, it would never work because of the routing issues you'll run into. With IPv6 it would theoretically be possible, but currently with ipv4 and NATs everywhere, your website would almost never be reachable, even with fancy workarounds like dynDNS

No good reason to do this, but I would imagine you could set up a site-to-site VPN with Wireguard (or hell, Tailscale) from your phone to a VPS, and have people hit the public server which routes back over your tunnel to your phone for access to the data.

I'm almost curious enough to try for myself.

Re: A simple web we own

#218

Post by thatcat »

aerhardt wrote: post #94
shevy-java wrote: post #75

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.

Even in our fabulously wealthy societies, people are mostly worried about paying their bills, taking care of their families, and putting food on the table, not in getting together in a quixotic enterprise and paying for thousands of kilometers of communal fiber. Also like in most communist utopias what would probably happen is that the control infrastructure would be captured by special interest groups and now you’ve…

municipally owned fiber isnt that rare or complicated

Re: A simple web we own

#220

Post by toddmorrow »

squeefers wrote: post #186
shevy-java wrote: post #75

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.

who pays for it then?

city wide municipal Internet service, which is admittedly last mile service, was so cheap it didn't even make a dent in the local tax rates. the cost was nominal. naturally the centralized providers fought to make municipal Internet illegal
Post reply on HN