rakoo

> I think they must have worked to some benefit to bring us here.

No, the other consequence of evolution is that whatever we are today is not enough to kill us. Some of the things in our bodies and behavior are just useless, but not bad enough that they endanger our life and cut the genetic deviation responsible for it, so it just keeps on being there.

There's no good reason we still have 5 fingers on feet, but they're also not bad enough that having them all would endanger us as as species, so they just stay there.

> starts to suffer under heavy loads

The figures from 1990 are not the same as the figures from 2024. "heavy" here is so high it is not a realistic problem for 80% of sites.

> I mean on the backup host without any dependencies so I can use standard file tools and browsers.

This means the backups are not encrypted though, and is something you really have to think twice before requiring

> "pull" (backup remote files)

You can mount the server to backup on the backup host, or you can ssh from the backup host to the server to backup, call `tar cf - /folder`, and ingest that from stdin on the backup host. Both will retransmit the totality of the files to backup

They're necessary because cities are built around the idea that everything must be done through a car, so roads become necessary. It's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The underlying discussion is all about urban planning and how we want societies to organize space.

I'm wondering if it would be better to have a LevelDB-like approach here. Store the recent stuff in DynamoDB, and once it hits the threshold, store it in a segment in S3. This is also similar to SQLite and WAL.

Really, nothing is ever new in computing.

So Fair use means "open source but only if you don't compete with me because I want to retain exclusive benefits for 2 years". I don't see how the goal couldn't be achieved by using AGPL and then going to another, less viral license after the 2 years. This has the advantage that at no point is the software not Free/Libre

> And yes, your apps certified Google as a trustable provider when they added support for it. Such support is not automatic, it requires non-trivial effort

Are you talking about the technical support (ie implementing APIs) or the bureaucratic support (ie going through Google's process) ? Because the first one is a result of Google going its own way with its own protocol, and the second is entirely a decision of Google.

> and presumable no one would do it for services they do not trust.

No, they would not do it for a service that is vital for the sustainability of their app. When Google is so hegemonic it's sometimes impossible to avoid, app developers must consider whether Google's ways are worth implementing not just based on Google but on the users' willing to make do with an app that doesn't work with Google. Not being compatible with Google is more often than not seen as a problem with the app, not with Google.

Quoting the message you replied to:

> the people I want to collaborate with use it

If I were an independent individual who didn't need any others, then it might be a decision I can make. That's the neo-liberal lie you are driven to believe. But we're always part of a society and can't exist without society. Some of the information I want to read has been elaborated and written for years in Google Drive. Some of the people who want to share stuff with me will only use Google Drive. Of course I do all my best to migrate them away, but it only works that much.

This assumes that Google can be trusted with my data and other apps can't, and that I'm ok with Google assessing the safety of other apps. It's something that is automatic, and right now it needs to be explained.

Yes, assessing the trustability of apps is important. No, I don't trust Google to do it properly. Maybe I didn't choose Google because I find them the best, but because I have to (because Google, surprise surprise, forces itself down the throat of everyone, so the people I want to collaborate with use it).

Did my apps certify Google as a trustable provider ?

Meta has had an active part in the genocide of Rohingya, though:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebo...

It is also responsible for a rise in hate crimes:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3082972

All of this still exists today though. It hasn't disappeared, it has only been drowned.

If you want to find it again, change your search engine. Use wiby.me, or search.marginalia.nu. Subscribe to RSS feeds of sites you find interesting, and go from there. Hop on gemini. Subscribe to some activitypub accounts (you don't even need an account for that). Communal IRC servers still exist, forums still exist, independent emails still exist.

Stop falling for the overall doomism HN is so quick to fall for, start doing and living what you want

I think it's ok in awk because awk is seen as a scripting language, where brevity matters and there aren't many variables anyway

> There’s tons more cool stuff that CouchDB does and its being used in mission critical infrastructure that you’re relying on every day :)

If you could share a bit on those I think the community would be extremely interested. There was that CERN thing a decade ago, if it's still true or there are other actors with similar amounts of data, there would be fewer comments about not finding CouchDB useful

Map/Reduce was a hype of the days it was created, but you're perfectly fine not using it. CouchDB has been integrating MongoDB-style queries for a few releases now, and this very release introduces a full-text search engine. Map/Reduce is still there because it just works.

The real shame is that Map/Reduce is simply a toy, easy-to-add bonus when looking at the data structure, but that's not what CouchDB is or ever was about. The one reason it was created is replication and simplistic conflict handling, and it does it perfectly.

The reason CouchDB never took off is that it targets offline-first, something you'll see associated with peer-to-peer systems, but does that only for servers: you're supposed to install that thing through packages, configure a text file, run it with your preferred daemon manager, ... If CouchDB had a simple desktop version you could start in one click and forget about, it would have been way more interesting. Alas.

Used it this school year for a research project that needs solid replication of content and a firehose of updates. There are dozens of such projects but nothing beats the simplicity and versatility of basic HTTP calls with JSON documents and the robustness of a 15-years old project that Just Works.

> If maximizing value is not the goal, then why should Marxism redefine value in a counter-intuitive way?

Because it's only an exchange value and doesn't take into account the myriad of things that also have value but are not a consequence of work ? And the goal of Marxism might not be to maximize exchange value ?

> In Marxist societies people are in charge that pretend to have the laborers best interest in their hearts

Hard disagree, looking at societies applying values evolved from Marxist theories I see people in charge of themselves. I think of the old Commune de Paris, of the Spanish Revolution, of the Rojava. You need to look further than the one example you have in mind.

You're assuming socialist/communist economies must, for some reason, be run exactly the same as capitalist economies. Of course if you're trying to mix both it will collapse.

The point of Marx isn't that we should create markets where the value is decided by the amount of labor. The point of Marx is that if Labor creates value, then Labor should be in charge. The problem being that Labor is hard, so the end goal cannot be to maximize Labor (or value), contrary to your implied way of thinking were the most value must be created.

> it's very easy to misconfigure, but basic security practices like these are highlighted in bright, bold warning text in the Firebase docs.

I'm sorry but if the whole design is "one big database shared with everyone and we must manually configure the database for auth" there is a problem that's deeper than just having to read the doc. It means the basic understanding of what it means to keep data as private as possible is not understood. A shared database only works when the server accesses it, not when client has direct access.

What Arc needs is to segregate each user's data in a different place, in the design of the database, not as part of configuration of custom code. Make it impossible to list all user's data, or even users. When, not if, an id is guessed, related data becomes accessible by someone else; make it so that someone else still can't read it, or can't replace it.

Yup, https://yunohost.org/ was built for that. You can manage your server entirely from the admin panel, installing pleroma or matrix or freshrss takes 3 clicks, and it can even manage your DNS zone for you. Mail and XMPP are included.

When you're feeling confident, you can then fiddle with the command line and explore what's happening behind the scenes.

This applies to both sides

> blowing up airplanes or launching rockets at residential areas intentionally targets civilians in order to spread a maximum amount of terror among the civilian population

Which is exactly what Israel has been doing for decades by

installing an apaitheid regime https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_apartheid

colonizing palestinian land https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories

kicking hundreds of thousands of people off of their homes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba

putting guns on their head day in day out https://www.msf.org/palestinians-face-harassment-and-violenc...

running on them with tanks while their families must watch https://euromedmonitor.org/en/article/6385?s=35

destroy the graves in an attempt to dehumanize even more https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_razing_of_cemeteries...

and on and on and on since a time when none of us was even born. Let's not pretend Israel is the good guy here. There are no good guys, and while I don't accept the acts of Hezbollah, what is a colonized people being genocided to do when the world doesn't care about them being denied human rights ?

I'm not sure the American pov is really the topic here. This story can have consequences for everyone. The USian government is not the center of the world

> So, instead of expanding everyone's access to the digital archives, they have managed to indefinitely limit it by creating a restricting legal precedent.

Let's not flip the situation upside down though: IA didn't limit anything, the publishers did. The publishers have the possibility to make this possible if they want, and they don't want to: the responsibility is entirely on them.

Yeah, it turned into neoliberalism. Not that capitalism was acceptable before, but it's definitely worse now

What's the point of having digital preservation if noone can read the archives ? Digital access make sense, it's the logical conclusion to what IA does

You have a very charitable view of this whole thing and I want to believe like you. Perhaps there is a virtuous cycle to be built where infrastructure that relies on people being more honest helps change the culture to actually be more honest which makes the infrastructure better. You don't wait for people to be nice before you create the gpl, the gpl changes mindsets towards opening up which fosters a better culture for creating more.

It's also very important to think in macro systems and societies, as you point out, rather than at the individual level

> This is content-presentation separation at best.

The idea is the best, but arguably the implementation is lacking.

> Is JSON-LD just reinventation of this?

Yup. It's "RDF/XML but we don't like XML"

Which was already possible with RDF. It is hard to not see JSON-LD as anything other than "RDF but in JSON because we don't like XML".

I don't think we necessarily need new tags: they narrow down the list of possible into an immutable set and require changing the structure of your already existing content. What exists instead are microformats (http://microformats.org/wiki/microformats2), a bunch of classes you sprinkle in your current HTML to "augment" it.

Semantic Web doesn't help with the most basic thing: how do you get information ? If I want to know when was the Matrix shot, where do I go ? Today we have for-profit centralized point to get all information, because it's the only way this can be sustainable. Semantic Web might make it more feasible, by instead having lots of small interconnected agents that trust each other, much like... a Web of Trust. Except we know where the last experiment went (nowhere).