The traffic is controlled by Google and social networks. Most people don't have the skills needed to run their own website. A lot of valuable content is created by people without these sorts of skills.
While I still inspire to launch a twitter 1.0 plain old less featured version, but the thought of moderation kills my motivation immediately. :(
There are still public computing facilities here, like sdfeu, envs.net etc, am not sure how they handle the moderation of spam and pirated content attack.
Indeed. But unlike machines (and AI, in the future), humans don't scale well. managing a potential audience of 10000 user with a few hundred commenters focused in a few countrie is an order of magnitude different from the millions of users with thousands of commenters and a very well established malicious actors with no respect for community.
It's more work, for more people, for less appreciation. It's also harder than ever to pay for labor as a small community, unless you are very well off.
To be clear, I think the admins are mostly white knuckling the moderation problem.
My point: at least there's something worthwhile there on the more desirable network to require moderation, rather than it all being on Facebook.
I could see why this might not scale as well to instances with thousands of users, or if a user is a frequent target of harassment (where opt-in federation might be the only solution), but for our lab, the existence of all the nazi or whatever instances has been resolved via a simple "Oh, these again. click, click, click There, the whole instance is banned." a few times a year. I have a suspicion that Dunbar's number or lower might be the optimal size for any federated social media instance, since knowing every user on my instance makes it a lot easier to tailor the little effort I have to put in.
[0] https://seirdy.one/posts/2023/05/02/fediverse-blocklists/
Is your email still valid as listed?
Didn't support scripts IIRC but with webassembly it doesn't have to be too difficult to support something like NextCloud I'd think.
No, it's a function of economics. Division of labour still works. It is not more profitable to run your own cloud and pay for your own traffic when you're specialized in producing content. It makes financial sense to pay someone to do that for you. The middleman is cheaper, that's why they exist. The internet looks like it does for only one reason, in any system of increasing complexity there are increased returns to specialization and trade.
> As much as I'd like to see a web 1.0 revival, this won't happen.
> The traffic is controlled by Google and social networks.
Maybe Web 1.0 won't return as the "dominant culture," but I wonder if something like it could return as a subculture.
> Most people don't have the skills needed to run their own website. A lot of valuable content is created by people without these sorts of skills.
Maybe we just need an new MS Frontpage for the new millennium?
With so many static site generators, I wonder how hard it’d be. Not that it’s simple, just thinking that an opinionated structure, a gui, and gluing it all together.
I’m shamelessly link to this thing I’m running[0] because I personally believe that subculture is already (still?) there and I’m doing what I can to help other people discover this fact.
Just recently I added a guestbook to my site and I’m having fun seeing other people doing the same.
Webrings are also doing a comeback. I have hope for a return of a more personal web, even as just a small subset of the whole web.
That and financial incentives. Substacks seems to be the most successful "web 1" implemenation in the past decade, but that still monetizes the idea (anthetical to a web 1 era).
Of course, the defaults would have to be basically zero-management. But people would be able to choose how much control over their own data they want versus how convenient they want it to be. Right now, it's pretty much all or nothing.
There's also RSS feeds
Horrible, confusing UX. Very limited feature sets. Mediocre performance, at best.
if that's supposed to be the future, call me a luddite I guess.
Super easy to run your own server to host content from a desk/laptop and super easy to use a client to visit other servers. You could find servers using trackers (name severs that kept track of hotline servers) or keep the server private and only give out the server info to people you want.
well that's the issue. There is no "small community" these days like there would be in the Usenet days. At least not a genreal purpose one for blogging whatever is on your mind. My parents wouldn't really care much about the content so much as supporting me. My friends don't necessarily share all the same interests as me. So you want to seek out like strangers on the internet to bond with.
That's part of why we transitioned to early web 2.0 of utilizing a middleman to host content, and use that to attract a community. The internet grew and people could focus exclusively on what they were genuinely interested in, as opposed to subscribing to users directly.
I think that the right place to provide this is at ISP level, positioning as a beefier router with extras.
I worked for an ISP before and did multiple projects involving consumer hardware. You do not want to be tied to whatever garbage your ISP decides to buy in bulk and give to.
You want your stuff to be movable between ISPs, however, so your domain registrar should be separate.
ISPs are not great, true, but why not build a good one? For a change.