Hacker News Reader

I think this argument is incorrect, or at least incomplete, if it does not stress locally-hosted software. If any work relies on whomever provides the internet connection and whomever provides the remote server, how is that “free”? Tech failures or business decisions will override user preferences.

To be free to do what I want, I have to be able to do it where (and how) I want. Modern machines are more than capable, so why are we relying on two intermediaries?

View on HN

Locally-hosted software is definitely important in the short term, but I think that distributed software will be enough in the long term. When everything is public, then there won't be the same risks associated with using networked software. In the long term, I expect the intermediaries to be public too.

But locally-hosted software should always still be possible. I included something similar as one of the core tenets in the repo where I outline an idea for how we get things going: "After cloning this repository, it should be possible to start a development instance of bartok with a single command." Based on your feedback I think we should tweak this to emphasise local use, because there's a distinction between using software locally for development and using it locally because you're using it locally. (https://gitlab.com/bartokio/bartok)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com