@enkiv2 terrifying end to the Independence of Cyberspace, and a bad move.

that many fools will cheer. such arsonist burn it down feelings in so many. wanting to blame, seeking the image of oppressors. we have only ourselves to blame for not making better. which we could. at any time. thanks to the great web browsers & open internet that is very much still alive.

@Shamar @jauntywunderkind420

Not only does the "open web" not exist, but it has never existed (basically because the URL/URI division was never properly made & therefore we're at the mercy of big hosts & domain registrars).

As soon as TBL decided to put the hostname of a server as part of an HTTP URL, centralization under the stacks became inevitable.

@Shamar @jauntywunderkind420

If the hug of death is a thing -- i.e., if too many people wanting a particular piece of data causes that piece of data to become impossible for any of them to fetch -- you immediately have a re-centralizing force that favors people who can afford beefier machines and fatter pipes.

@Shamar @jauntywunderkind420

Caching matters, absolutely. And big websites spend lots of money on CDN services that cache their content physically near different ISPs, to decrease both load and latency.

A CAN, in comparison, gives you this kind of caching for free, in proportion to the popularity of a hash, while simultaneously makes tracking impossible (because you can't make literally every node collude with you).

Plus it removes server-side dynamic content, which shouldn't exist anyway.

@enkiv2 @Shamar if a user can download a signed page of assets (what webpackage does) and another user can take it& open it& be at that same url, see that it is signed... that IS a CAN, one using urls as it so happens

@enkiv2 @Shamar I really wish we wouldn't take narrow views of what tech is & isn't for, be willing to accept expanding vision & expanding possibilities

@enkiv2 @Shamar the old web wasnt that great. fundamentally it just meant all state lived on the server. all forms all processes, all of it was far off.

the page as a browser of informations is to me much truer. the page has an obligation it's many implementations alas fail to fulfill, the contract to keep the url of it's current visible thing active. the viewer still has to cite what it is viewing. the document has a primacy. and pages fall fr that grace. and that's bad. but the architecture isn't bad.


@enkiv2 @Shamar in fact, to me, the chief failing of that page-as-information-browser architecture we've arrived at is that most pages only view content from a single host. the site hosts it's browser, but that browser only can operate in the confines of the host. a silly limitation.

· · Web · 1 · 2 · 1

@enkiv2 @Shamar the most exalted web apps are information-browsers across sites. Rss readers. Podcast listeners. (Non-closed) Social networks.

@enkiv2 @Shamar documents are wonderful but the toolkit to understand and view them should not be absolute. a document to me only suggests it's preffered viewers

@enkiv2 @Shamar a lot of points about the dynamism of the page, the nature of the web. what's still somewhat missing from the pieces i've laid down is the web architecture.

the web to me isn't just docs & links, it's also an auto generative system of more links & more docs. it's the ability for pages to be enrichening the constellation of information with new points, new links. the page is also a tool to work & build within the constellations it can be a part of.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

cybrespace: the social hub of the information superhighway jack in to the mastodon fediverse today and surf the dataflow through our cybrepunk, slightly glitchy web portal support us on patreon or liberapay!