Live data from Hacker News

Local-first software (2019)

inkandswitch.com

31–40 of 308 posts

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#31
post #25

Personally, I disagree with this approach. This is trying to solve a business problem (I can't trust cloud-providers) with a technical trade-off (avoid centralized architecture). The problems with closed-source software (lack of control, lack of reliability) were solved with a new business model: open source development, which came with new licenses and new ways of getting revenue (maintenance contracts instead of li…

Currently there are laws but not for hosting. Look at the contract of Steam for example or Ubisoft, or anything else - Q: What happens to your game collection if we shut down our servers? A: You own nothing and lose everything, GG! It is like that we must protect users privacy from greedy websites so we will make the bad ones spell out that they use cookies to spy on users - and the result is what we have now with th…

I agree with you! And your point about cookie banners underlines that we can't just rely on regulation (because companies are so good are subverting or outright lobbying their way out of them).

Just as with the open source movement, there needs to be a business model (and don't forget that OSS is a business model, not a technology) that competes with the old way of doing things.

Getting that new business model to work is the hard part, but we did it once with open source and I think we can do it again with cloud infrastructure. But I don't think local-first is the answer--that's just a dead end because normal users will never go with it.

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#32
post #23

Self hosting (which is often adjacent to local-first software) is fine. I've done it for years. But it is a nightmare when it goes wrong: the conclusion I've reached is that it is out of reach to regular people who don't want the Byzantine support load that could accompany something going wrong. They want turnkey. They want simple. They aren't interested in operating services, they're interested in using them. The FL…

I was about to suggest that a better, more open, and fair form of capitalism would need to be used as a tool...but then, re-reading your comment - "...leverage the power of centralised, professional operations and development, but to govern it democratically..." - i think you better encapsulate what i meant to convey. :-)

That being said, yes, i do believe *in the near/upcoming future* local-first, self-hosting and i will add more fair open source vendors will work! Well, at least, i hope so! I say that because Europe's recent desire to pivot away from the big U.s. tech companies, and towards more digital sovereignty - in my opinion - begins the foundational dependency for an ecosystem that will/could sustain self hosting, etc. The more that europe is able to pivot away from big tech, the more possibilty exists for more and varied non-big tech vendors manifest...and the more that Europe adopts open source, the more the possibility that usage and expertise of self-hosting grows....plus, for those who do not know how to, or simply do not wish to manage services themselves...well, in time i think Europe will have fostered a vast array of vendors who can provide such open source, digital services, but get paid a fair cost for providing fair value/services, etc. ...and, by the way, i say this all as a biased person in favor of open source AS WELL AS being an American. :-)

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#33
100%! Not only local-first. But also private, zero/minimal dependency, open source and environment agnostic!

If there is anyone interested in working on such projects - let's talk! We can't leave our future to greedy surveillance zealots.

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#34
post #7

Anything with online dependencies will necessarily require ongoing upkeep and ongoing costs. If a system is not local-first (or ideally local-only), it’s not designed for long-term dependability. Connected appliances and cars have got to be the stupidest bit of engineering from a practical standpoint.

The entire thing is because of subscription revenue. It’s self reinforcing because those companies that get subscription revenue have both more revenue and higher valuations enabling more fund raising, causing them to beat out companies that do not follow this model. This is why local first software died.

I remember seeing somebody summarize this as "SaaS is a pricing model" or "SaaS is financialization" and it totally rings true. Compared to normal software pricing, a subscription gives you predictable recurring revenue and a natural sort of price discrimination (people who use your system more, pay more). It's also a psychological thing: folks got anchored on really low up-front prices for software, so paying $2000 for something up-front sounds crazy even if you use it daily for years, but paying $25/month feels reasonable. (See also how much people complain about paying $60 for video games which they play for thousands of hours!)

It's sad because the dynamics and incentives around clear, up-front prices seem generally better than SaaS (more user control, less lock-in), but almost all commercial software morphs into SaaS thanks to a mix of psychology, culture and market dynamics.

There are other advantages to having your software and data managed by somebody else, but they are far less determinative than structural and pricing factors. In a slightly different world, it's not hard to imagine relatively expensive software up-front that comes with a smaller, optional (perhaps even third-party!) subscription service for data storage and syncing. It's a shame that we do not live in that world.

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#35

Personally, I disagree with this approach. This is trying to solve a business problem (I can't trust cloud-providers) with a technical trade-off (avoid centralized architecture). The problems with closed-source software (lack of control, lack of reliability) were solved with a new business model: open source development, which came with new licenses and new ways of getting revenue (maintenance contracts instead of li…

> * Data portability guarantees: Vendors must spell out how data gets migrated out, and all formats must be either open or (at minimum) fully documented.

This is not practical for data of any size. Prod migrations to a new database take months or even years if you want things to go smoothly. In a crisis you can do it in weeks but it can be really ugly, That applies even when moving between the same version of open source database, because there's a lot of variation between the cloud services themselves.

The best solution is to have the data in your own environment to begin with and just unplug. It's possible with bring-your-own-cloud management combined with open source.

My company operates a BYOC data product which means I have an economic interest in this approach. On the other hand I've seen it work, so I know it's possible.

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#36
Complete agreement. Here's a brief, practical action plan for Windows users:

  * Download all your data from Microsoft's "OneDrive" cloud storage, which if not disabled, is the default storage method in a new Windows install.
  * Verify that all your files are now stored locally.
  * Click the gear icon, go to "Settings -> "Account" -> "Unlink this PC," right-click, "Unlink account".
  * Remove Microsoft's OneDrive app from your system -- full removal is the only way to prevent perpetual harassment and reactivation. Go to "Apps" -> "Apps & features" (or "Installed apps" on Windows 11) -> "Microsoft OneDrive", right-click, "Uninstall."
  * Optional extra step: cancel your Microsoft 365 subscription and install LibreOffice (free, open-source).
Remember this -- cloud storage only has advantages for Microsoft and law enforcement (which have a number of easy ways to gain access to your documents compared to local storage). For a Windows user, cloud storage is the ultimate Dark Pattern.

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#37

In theory, I love the local-first mode of building. It aligns well with “small tech” philosophy where privacy and data ownership are fundamental. In practice, it’s hard! You’re effectively responsible for building a sync engine, handling conflict resolution, managing schema migration, etc. This said, tools for local-first software development seem to have improved in the past couple years. I keep my eye on jazz.tools…

This site also has a directory of devtools: https://lofi.so/

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#38

Personally, I disagree with this approach. This is trying to solve a business problem (I can't trust cloud-providers) with a technical trade-off (avoid centralized architecture). The problems with closed-source software (lack of control, lack of reliability) were solved with a new business model: open source development, which came with new licenses and new ways of getting revenue (maintenance contracts instead of li…

> * Data portability guarantees: Vendors must spell out how data gets migrated out, and all formats must be either open or (at minimum) fully documented. This is not practical for data of any size. Prod migrations to a new database take months or even years if you want things to go smoothly. In a crisis you can do it in weeks but it can be really ugly, That applies even when moving between the same version of open so…

I'd love to know more about BYOC. Does that apply to the raw data (e.g., the database lives inside the enterprise) or the entire application stack (e.g., the enterprise is effectively self-hosting the cloud).

It seems like you'd need the latter to truly be immune to cloud-vendor problems. [But I may not understand how it works.]

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#39
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire thing is because of subscription revenue. It’s self reinforcing because those companies that get subscription revenue have both more revenue and higher valuations enabling more fund raising, causing them to beat out companies that do not follow this model. This is why local first software died.

The root cause of the problem is that it's easier to make personalized stuff with server/backend (?cloud?) than without maybe? Example: I made a firefox extension that automatically fills forms using LLM. It's fully offline (except OPTIONALLY) the LLM part, optionally because it also supports Ollama locally. Now the issue is that it's way too hard for most people to use: find the LLM to run, acquire it somehow (pay t…

Can the LLM not help with setting up the local part? (Sorry, was just the first thought i had.)

Re: Local-first software (2019)

#40
There is now a great annual Local-first Software conference in Berlin (https://www.localfirstconf.com/) organised by Ink and Switch, and it's spawned a spin out Sync Conf this November in SF (https://syncconf.dev/)

There was a great panel discussion this year from a number of the co-authors of the the paper linked, discussing what is Local-first software in the context of dev tools and what they have learnt since the original paper. It's very much worth watching: https://youtu.be/86NmEerklTs?si=Kodd7kD39337CTbf

The community are very much settling on "Sync" being a component of local first, but applicable so much wider. Along with local first software being a characteristic of end user software, with dev tools - such as sync engines - being an enabling tool but not "local first" in as much themselves.

The full set of talks from the last couple of years are online here: https://youtube.com/@localfirstconf?si=uHHi5Tsy60ewhQTQ

It's an exciting time for the local-first / sync engine community, we've been working on tools that enable realtime collaborative and async collaborative experiences, and now with the onset of AI the market for this is exploring. Every AI app is inherently multi user collaborative with the agents as actors within the system. This requires the tech that the sync engine community has been working on.

Post reply on HN