"Building a website from scratch, with hard-coded gif animations and a web-ring, is now part of the back-to-the-land tradition."


I just generally think that if we want to make the internet (and the world?) better then "taking a few steps back" will get us there faster than endlessly trying to 'leap' forward.


Web 3? No thank you. Web 1.0 please.
Electric cars? No thank you. Light rails, trains, and bikes, please.
Ever faster computing devices? No thank you. Cleaner, leaner, and more minimalist software, please.

@ffsanton no. You will not get that. Here have my new smartphone which is even slower because it tracks every single movement it does to "enhance your experience"
Who cares about battery lifes. HAHA!

@NexCarter @ffsanton I never owned a smartphone. And I'm a technology teacher. It can be done, if only we want it.

@ffsanton didn't web 2.0 introduce rss and wikis (and even fedi) though?

@lambdagoat @ffsanton the fediverse doesn't depend on web browsers. You could just use native clients connecting to the servers.

They'd use HTTPS, yes. But the main problem with the web are web standards and browsers. A native fediverse client would not have those issues (unless it's electron)

@lambdagoat @ffsanton No, web 2.0 was this dynamic crap called AJAX everybody used on their website, but was almost as useless as todays endless scrolling websites, adding a buzzword now and then and not providing any information, while your RAM explodes.

@lambdagoat @ffsanton RSS was really the first wave of the web, coming during the brief dotcom boom when blogs are starting to become a thing.

I consider web2 to begin in 2004, when Google discovers "behavioral surplus", and the surveillance capital business model then begins.

@lambdagoat Yeah, I realized that a good few hours after I wrote this. Pre-facebook Web2.0 is where it's at.

@ffsanton I wish there were some solution for those that dislike interacting with society whenever possible that didn't involve bikes but can haul stuff, plus were safer for pedestrians and better for the environment than cars (any type). Faster hardware is concerning though for how much the power draw is increasing, particularly on GPUs. Efficient software is part of why I prefer Windows Forms over WPF, because it's way lighter (even though it's sadly mostly CPU-bound).


There are important applications for which "motor vehicles" of some kind are an excellent fit, even in urban areas. Ambulances, fire engines, taxicabs, some kinds of delivery services come to mind. For many of those, battery-electrics will serve well in place of the internal-combustion engine.

But overall I really think that most countries could do very well with 1 automobile per 10 people, rather than 2 per 3 as in Bavaria, or 5 per 4 as in the USA. Driving is an awful use of time!

@ffsanton For more than a week I am looking for the most sustainable operating system. I learnt a lot yet, but if I keep doing researchs I will start building my own 16-bit computer with microcontrollers soon.

@utopify_org I replied to another reply in this thread that while all these thigns are 10/10 great ideas, I'm still mostly looking for something where the barrier to entry is *a little* lower (technically speaking).

@ffsanton There are gemini proxies, which can translate those sites to http: https://portal.mozz.us/gemini/gemini.circumlunar.space/

I think the hard thing is to find sites at all, because it's like the real beginning of the web. There are link lists, but to get listed there you have to write to the hoster of the list, like in good old times were Google didn't exist.

But is the barrier really that hard? Installing a web browser for gemini is all it takes...

@ffsanton I wouldn't dismiss many of the innovations introduced by the Web 2.0. RSS feeds, wikis, messaging and social media based on open protocols, they are all features that made the web more dynamic and bidirectional.

We were also going in the right direction until ~2010 - Facebook Chat and Google Talk would still use XMPP, Google Reader was still an important resource to aggregate content, and there were a lot of promises in the field of semantic web that could have made the machine-to-machine web a thing and it could have potentially made web scraping obsolete.

Then of course Google and Facebook got way too much power, and they used that power to close up everything, create their surveillance-based walled gardens and stifle innovation. But just because history went down that path it doesn't mean that we have to go back to static pages.

@blacklight you’re 100% right. I think pre-facebook era Web2.0 was Peak Golden Age of Internet

@blacklight @ffsanton why do you define these things as web2 and not #web1? i think the differentiating element is an ideology, a centralising capitalist ideology, and not a point in time.

@nebuchi @ffsanton @web1 the web1/web2 transition was mainly about technology, not ideology.

Web 2 was seen as an evolution towards the bidirectionalness of the web. Users could easily create their own pages on a platform, upload content, and that content could be presented in multiple ways. Bulletin boards and forum had been around earlier as well, but their features were quite limited compared to e.g. MySpace or MediaWiki.

The move to Web 2 was a paradigm shift from a web mostly intended as consume-only to a web where the lines between consumer and producer were removed. Suddenly anybody could run their blog, easily build a profile page or contribute to a wiki.

This, at least, was the original intention. Then private platforms came over and monopolized the game by making sure that all interactions only happened on a limited number of walled gardens. But that had nothing to do with web 2 and the original idea that was behind it. They hijacked what we were building, and now we just need to make it very clear that we want to go back to the exact point in time before they screwed things up.

@ffsanton hydroponics? no thanks. soil revival, shmita, local permaculture, urban foraging.

@ffsanton I agree to a point, but with some reservations about minimalist software for instance. There's a nuance between bloat and useful features, and some "minimalist" attempts minimize until they're effectively unusable to get anything done.

As for faster computing devices, I'd like it but I'd like for it to also come with lesser energy requirements, better repairability and hardware freedom.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Revel in the marvels of the universe. We are a collective of forward-thinking individuals who strive to better ourselves and our surroundings through constant creation. We express ourselves through music, art, games, and writing. We also put great value in play. A warm welcome to any like-minded people who feel these ideals resonate with them.