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

The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

ouvre-boite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 81 posts

Re: The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

#41

Post by necovek »

pdonis wrote: post #28
alephnerd wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't do social media You do realize Hacker News is social media right? And that too owned and operated by YCombinator. And unscrupulous data crawlers have been mining HN's datasets for years. Heck, there's a fairly robust live HN dataset on Hugging Face right now [0]. OP is right. [0] - https://huggingface.co/datasets/open-index/hacker-news

> You do realize Hacker News is social media right? No, I don't. HN is a news and discussion site. It's not trying to monetize my data. > unscrupulous data crawlers have been mining HN's datasets for years They've been mining every byte of data that's visible on the web for years. That doesn't make every single website on the Internet social media.

Was Facebook social media before it started adding ads or not?

Will non-monetized old school "forums" escape the wrath of "social media" bans for children? Will HN?

Re: The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

#42

Post by bruce511 »

echelon wrote: post #19
bruce511 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, I'm not sure I even understand what the term "Open web" is supposed to mean? Does it mean that each individual and company is hosting their stuff on their own physical hardware? Is it OK to use say AWS? Does it mean that Facebook is the Open Web as long as you work at Facebook? But it's not if you don't? Is any site with a login "not the open web"? So if I'm hosting on my own metal, paid for by paying s…

A world where hyperscalers don't dictate the technology choices of 99.99% of people and totally control distribution. A world where platform taxes and gatekeeping don't stifle innovation or put a ceiling on startups. A world where the balance of power is more evenly distributed. A world where single giant point of failures can't dictate the security posture and privacy of the entire civilization. The brief period of…

I feel like you're describing pretty much every industry ever.

You could be talking about food, or insurance or cars or planes or health or (dare I say it?) politics.

Of course there are well understood commercial reasons for industries consolidating. Primarily because consumers prefer it.

But while your post is good on rhetoric, it still lacks the concrete definition I seek. Specifically what hardware, OS, VM software, site-creation tools, subscription options, advertising networks, payment processors, and so on must I use to reach "Open web" status?

You're describing a world, which is a fair desire. But when I go to the local bakery to pitch an online presence, what exactly am I pitching, and how does this pitch serve the goals of that bakery?

Re: The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

#43

Post by add-sub-mul-div »

nine_k wrote: post #38
yalogin wrote: post #3

Why use the present continuous tense? We can safely use the past tense as llms definitely killed it. The web of course isn’t going to vanish but there is no motivation for anyone to create a new site now.

What is the point of playing guitar any more? You're not going to be another Elvis. You're not going to be another Robert Plant or Paco de Lucia, even if you play equally good. The world is choke-full of excellent guitar music recordings. People still play guitar nevertheless. They do it for the enjoyment of the few friends sitting next to them, and, most of all, for the fun they personally have in the process. If yo…

Your metaphor doesn't apply. It's not pointless to create a new site because better ones exist. It's pointless because it will get scraped and summarized/remixed for someone else's profit, if the few sites people use for discovery even deign to index it. And the people who do consume it will be too lazy to read it in its original unsummarized form.

You can still journal for the love of writing, but why put the effort into publishing for so little return?

Re: The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

#44

Post by bruce511 »

cosmicgadget wrote: post #36
bruce511 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, I'm not sure I even understand what the term "Open web" is supposed to mean? Does it mean that each individual and company is hosting their stuff on their own physical hardware? Is it OK to use say AWS? Does it mean that Facebook is the Open Web as long as you work at Facebook? But it's not if you don't? Is any site with a login "not the open web"? So if I'm hosting on my own metal, paid for by paying s…

> Is any site with a login "not the open web"? This one. The open web is freely accessible to anyone on the internet. > So if I'm hosting on my own metal, paid for by paying subscribers, then I'm not Open Web? Yes. It's not necessarily bad, it's just not open.

Thanks for the feedback. So hosting on say Wix is still Open Web?

I suppose, is the converse free? Is a site that allows access without a login Open Web? Like say YouTube?

Re: The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

#46

Post by blast »

nine_k wrote: post #38
yalogin wrote: post #3

Why use the present continuous tense? We can safely use the past tense as llms definitely killed it. The web of course isn’t going to vanish but there is no motivation for anyone to create a new site now.

What is the point of playing guitar any more? You're not going to be another Elvis. You're not going to be another Robert Plant or Paco de Lucia, even if you play equally good. The world is choke-full of excellent guitar music recordings. People still play guitar nevertheless. They do it for the enjoyment of the few friends sitting next to them, and, most of all, for the fun they personally have in the process. If yo…

Well said and I agree completely...but did Robert Plant play guitar?

Re: The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

#47

Post by anonymous »

jacquesm wrote: post #29
yalogin wrote: post #3

Why use the present continuous tense? We can safely use the past tense as llms definitely killed it. The web of course isn’t going to vanish but there is no motivation for anyone to create a new site now.

I am happy to ignore the scrapers (I block them wholesale) and will probably move to something even more drastic in the near future.

No post body was provided.

Re: The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

#48

Post by blast »

kunai wrote: post #9

I do find it quite ironic that this piece reeks of LLM-writing while also simultaneously decrying the death of everything that is in antithesis to things like that. Is there a single shred of originality or shame left in the SV-adjacent writing sphere?

"The lesson is not just to resist. It is to grow up."

Barf.

Re: The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

#49

Post by blast »

152334H wrote: post #21
kunai wrote: post #9

I do find it quite ironic that this piece reeks of LLM-writing while also simultaneously decrying the death of everything that is in antithesis to things like that. Is there a single shred of originality or shame left in the SV-adjacent writing sphere?

Best to treat it with some emotional distance. It's not like the optimization process feels it. Whether be it human dullards, scripted botfarms, or even maleficence -- none of them experience shame. If they do see it at all, it would be as one of many factors to boost engagement.

Fuck boosting engagement.

Re: The open web isn't dying, we're killing it

#50

Post by bruce511 »

jacquesm wrote: post #25
echelon wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A world where hyperscalers don't dictate the technology choices of 99.99% of people and totally control distribution. A world where platform taxes and gatekeeping don't stifle innovation or put a ceiling on startups. A world where the balance of power is more evenly distributed. A world where single giant point of failures can't dictate the security posture and privacy of the entire civilization. The brief period of…

The no monoculture one is the big one for me. And I think 2008 is very generous.

I get the concept of this at a principle level. But how does it play out for you? I mean, to what extent do you succumb to the monoculture because while principles are good, you live in the real world?

So, like, what phone OS do you use? There's not much choice but did you choose Android over iOS because it's more open? Or did you go the whole way and use PalmOS or Symbian? Do you pick airlines based on what planes they fly? Do you choose Bing over Google?

I say this not to judge but rather to highlight the wide gap between principle and reality. We live in a real world, and the world consolidates behind a small number of providers because that has proven to be a beneficial strategy. (And yes, those providers can then abuse us.)

But I don't want to choose between 20 political parties, or 10 credit card processors or have to build apps for 15 phone OS's.

The sadness of losing the early days of choice and wildness are not limited to the web. Before that we lost the 20 brands of PC (all with custom OS) that we had in the 80s. Every new industry goes through this process, and every generation misses the wild heady days of its youth.

Post reply on HN