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

A website to destroy all websites

henry.codes

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 420 posts

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#361

Post by notahacker »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #189
dinobones wrote: post #11

I used the early web. I miss forums, I miss the small webmaster, I miss making fun, small websites to share with friends. And while you could make the argument that these forms of media were superior to TikTok, I’d also argue that this is mostly just taste. While we have closed ecosystems now, they’re much easier to make and share content to than the web of the past. It’s much easier to get distribution and go viral.…

> I used the early web. I miss forums, I miss the small webmaster, I miss making fun, small websites to share with friends. None of these things are gone. They're just not new anymore for a lot more people, and they probably have significantly less social impact and cachet. But that's all.

Yeah. It's actually the opposite: the original web considering of home pages and niche forums participated in exclusively by actual humans is very much still there, even if sometimes in different places.

It's "web 2.0" consisting of centralised networks full of your friends and friends of friends posting photos, updates and invitations that's being killed by those networks promoting "engagement bait" and generated content and bot accounts

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#362

Post by rdiddly »

GTP wrote: post #359

This isn't the first post I read on HN about this topic. While the content differs, the core ideas tend to be similar. The problem isn't about knowing that we can do it, the problem is actually getting around doing it. I have two blogs, one with a specific topic [1], another I created to share everything else that I feel like writing about [2]. Plus a personal "profile" page [3]. Both blogs only have one post, the fi…

Yeah, a blog isn't just a place to quickly jot things down, it's actually work. And because it's work, and it's optional, you sort of have to feel like it's "the work you should be doing," or at least part of or ancillary to, "the work you should be doing," or else it will just feel like busywork, and/or get postponed indefinitely. Posting on an existing platform is lower-stakes. But then again, if you end up putting lots of effort into posts on an existing platform, you're still doing most of the work, and one could infer that you care about it at least that much. In those cases I would recommend doing the initial setup of an actual blog etc., which is just a one-time operation pretty much.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#363

Post by markus_zhang »

jimbokun wrote: post #163
markus_zhang wrote: post #20

I'll counter propose a website to destroy all websites: https://bellard.org/ That's all we need. Maybe throw in a few images: http://www.candlekeep.com/

Seeing bellard.org for the first time just warmed my heart.

Yeah agree. One interested in CS can literally stay there for years. This guy is so smart.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#364

Post by scroot »

gordian-mind wrote: post #348

Reading this, I kept wondering whether it would stay on the technical level or whether it would immediately start broadcasting the author’s cultural politics. It does, and the first giveaway is the kind of sentence you’ve seen a thousand times: “These days, however, we write increasing amounts of complicated, unsecure code to express less and less meaning, in order to infinitely generate shareholder value.” That line…

> treating the economic world as a gross external thing

Well, a _specific_ kind of economic world in this case. Is it not a matter of fact that big tech companies largely guide how computing is used a developed, and that they are beholden to ever-expected increases in value to their shareholders? You have still have an "economic world" that doesn't operate that way.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#365

Post by jimbokun »

shimman wrote: post #167
jimbokun wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's useless without describing concrete, practical solutions to those problems. What do the voters want? Zero taxes, no crime, world peace and infinite benefits. It's easy to identify things as shitty because the above doesn't describe the world yet and thus it's a banal observation. Implementing real, practical improvements is really hard and requires much more thought and consideration and introduces the possibili…

Why don't people that perpetuate the current system defend its existence? Why is the onus on us to develop a new realm of government when the current system never had to do this? Your comment is "but you live in society too!" Society acknowledging the shitty things is the first action in rectifying them.

Case in point.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#366

Post by jimbokun »

shimman wrote: post #225
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

God did not create the current system of government on the seventh day of creation. The current system had to defend its existence (or rather, creation) at the time of its origin. The thing about criticism is, we're a long way from "the worst possible outcome". That is, there is a lot that the current system gets right. That's why the burden of proof gets put on the one proposing changes. The wrong change could make…

No, neoliberalism is only 50ish years old and all it did was usher in nascent fascism and income inequality.

What is your proposal and what is your evidence it will make things better without introducing even worse problems?

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#367

Post by jimbokun »

venturecruelty wrote: post #218
jimbokun wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's useless without describing concrete, practical solutions to those problems. What do the voters want? Zero taxes, no crime, world peace and infinite benefits. It's easy to identify things as shitty because the above doesn't describe the world yet and thus it's a banal observation. Implementing real, practical improvements is really hard and requires much more thought and consideration and introduces the possibili…

Not every complaint needs to have a goddamn essay attached describing some utopia. Sometimes you just need to kvetch, and I'm sick of getting tone policed otherwise about it.

People who kvetch a lot are not good people to work with. And past a certain point, even to be around.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#368

Post by jimbokun »

100721 wrote: post #206
jimbokun wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Genuinely curious: would you mind please explaining to me how your contributions are more productive than the person you are responding to (read: attacking)? It reads like you are upset at the poster using "DEI" and projecting your own behaviors onto them ("tedious and unproductive political discourse", "immune from critique or any burden of evidence").

Fair enough.

Re: A website to destroy all websites

#370

Post by cosmicgadget »

CGamesPlay wrote: post #182
garganzol wrote: post #179

To give it a different light: by using an indie web approach (i.e. self host), there is an intrinsic guarantee that a publisher has put at least some effort and resources to make their materials public. This ensures that the published materials have certain authenticity and inherent amount of quality. Publishing them "the indie way" functions as a kind of proof of work: not a guarantee of excellence, but evidence tha…

> To sum it up: this is not so much a problem of the internet as a lack of discernment among its users. This is very true. I've found that there's more good content than there ever was before, but that there's also much more bad content, too, so the good is harder to find. RSS helps me, curated newsletters help me. What else helps build this discernment?

Organic links from trusted sources. "I trust Blogger X so I trust links from their blog."
Post reply on HN