4 ms·

The problem is the complexity of all the specifications that make up the Web. These specifications are heavily influenced by whatever major browsers already are

The problem is the complexity of all the specifications that make up the Web. These specifications are heavily influenced by whatever major browsers already are doing (i.e. influenced by a handful of huge tech companies). These companies have a vested interest in making it hard to make a new, competitive browser. I think the Web is unredeemable at this point; there is so much entrenched complexity, ugly hacks, centralization, and misuse of various technologies that it can never be undone. The only solution is to refuse to contribute to the Web at all, which is hardly an option for most of us here.

thomastjeffery 9y ago
The solution is to fork, or start over. I like the latter idea.
- hossbeast 9y ago
  Are there any ongoing efforts in that regard? I guess IPFS, but even then, you're serving html.
  - xj9 9y ago
    its slow going, but that's what i'm trying to do with heropunch[0]. our goal is to create a p2p application platform using a handful of libre technologies: secure scuttlebutt, ipfs, lxc, enlightenment foundation libraries, rust, and elixir. [1]: https://www.heropunch.io https://www.heropunch.io
- krapp 9y ago
  Great. I support this. Go build your new web and leave those of us who believe the existing web, despite its faults, has value, be.
  - abiox 9y ago
    just about anything people invest time into is going to have some sort of value, 'despite faults'. that doesn't really speak to the value of progress, reflecting on the status quo, or creating something fresh with lessons learned from the past. i don't really get the 'leave you be' bit.
    - krapp 9y ago
      >i don't really get the 'leave you be' bit. Simple. More than a few people here seem to believe, as the grandparent comment suggests, that the web is a lost cause, or irredeemable, and all those people seem to want to do is to constantly complain about it. I'm simply suggesting that if people feel the web has nothing to offer them, that it would be more productive for them to kindly leave it for a network that better suits their needs. Otherwise, rather than wanting to "fork the web and start over" they could consider working to improve what we have.
      - abiox 9y ago
        viewing the web as a lost cause or irredeemable is not the same as saying it has nothing to offer. 'leaving the web' also doesn't seem very pragmatic, at least until something better is available.
        krapp 9y ago
        >viewing the web as a lost cause or irredeemable is not the same as saying it has nothing to offer I disagree - if it has something to offer then it's not a lost cause. A lost cause by definition isn't worth saving, or even engaging with. > 'leaving the web' also doesn't seem very pragmatic, at least until something better is available. The comment I replied to earlier suggested that the only reasonable solution to the web was to fork it or start over, with starting over being preferable. I'm merely suggesting that someone should actually get started on that. Or maybe revive Gopher. I hear that's still around.
        abiox 9y ago
        people can get started on that, and probably are. but the web exists, and the web is pervasive. it doesn't make any sense to abandon it until a replacement arrives... just as it makes no sense to simply abandon gas engines (and what, walk?) before electric ones are ready to replace them. the real question is whether the New Thing can avoid the problems of it's predecessor.
  - thomastjeffery 9y ago
    Well, I certainly don't want to do it alone, if I want to do it in the first place. It sounds an awful lot like you are complaining, but about what, I am not sure. I don't see how I am not letting you be, either. Creating a new system does not involve you at all, until you find a personal interest in that system, or its development.
Retric 9y ago
I think we could build a simple standard that does the useful parts of layout / CSS and includes a sane scripting language in a reasonable timeframe. It would need to be accessible both for users and developers. The hard part would be enforcing behavior so you don't end up with venders adding their own bits which destroy the entire point of the thing.
sliverstorm 9y ago
I think the Web is unredeemable at this point; there is so much entrenched complexity, ugly hacks, centralization, and misuse of various technologies that it can never be undone. Somewhere, an AMP developer coughs indignantly

thomastjeffery 9y ago

The solution is to fork, or start over. I like the latter idea.

hossbeast 9y ago
Are there any ongoing efforts in that regard? I guess IPFS, but even then, you're serving html.
- xj9 9y ago
  its slow going, but that's what i'm trying to do with heropunch[0]. our goal is to create a p2p application platform using a handful of libre technologies: secure scuttlebutt, ipfs, lxc, enlightenment foundation libraries, rust, and elixir. [1]: https://www.heropunch.io https://www.heropunch.io
krapp 9y ago
Great. I support this. Go build your new web and leave those of us who believe the existing web, despite its faults, has value, be.
- abiox 9y ago
  just about anything people invest time into is going to have some sort of value, 'despite faults'. that doesn't really speak to the value of progress, reflecting on the status quo, or creating something fresh with lessons learned from the past. i don't really get the 'leave you be' bit.
  - krapp 9y ago
    >i don't really get the 'leave you be' bit. Simple. More than a few people here seem to believe, as the grandparent comment suggests, that the web is a lost cause, or irredeemable, and all those people seem to want to do is to constantly complain about it. I'm simply suggesting that if people feel the web has nothing to offer them, that it would be more productive for them to kindly leave it for a network that better suits their needs. Otherwise, rather than wanting to "fork the web and start over" they could consider working to improve what we have.
    - abiox 9y ago
      viewing the web as a lost cause or irredeemable is not the same as saying it has nothing to offer. 'leaving the web' also doesn't seem very pragmatic, at least until something better is available.
      - krapp 9y ago
        >viewing the web as a lost cause or irredeemable is not the same as saying it has nothing to offer I disagree - if it has something to offer then it's not a lost cause. A lost cause by definition isn't worth saving, or even engaging with. > 'leaving the web' also doesn't seem very pragmatic, at least until something better is available. The comment I replied to earlier suggested that the only reasonable solution to the web was to fork it or start over, with starting over being preferable. I'm merely suggesting that someone should actually get started on that. Or maybe revive Gopher. I hear that's still around.
        abiox 9y ago
        people can get started on that, and probably are. but the web exists, and the web is pervasive. it doesn't make any sense to abandon it until a replacement arrives... just as it makes no sense to simply abandon gas engines (and what, walk?) before electric ones are ready to replace them. the real question is whether the New Thing can avoid the problems of it's predecessor.
- thomastjeffery 9y ago
  Well, I certainly don't want to do it alone, if I want to do it in the first place. It sounds an awful lot like you are complaining, but about what, I am not sure. I don't see how I am not letting you be, either. Creating a new system does not involve you at all, until you find a personal interest in that system, or its development.

Retric 9y ago

I think we could build a simple standard that does the useful parts of layout / CSS and includes a sane scripting language in a reasonable timeframe. It would need to be accessible both for users and developers. The hard part would be enforcing behavior so you don't end up with venders adding their own bits which destroy the entire point of the thing.

sliverstorm 9y ago

I think the Web is unredeemable at this point; there is so much entrenched complexity, ugly hacks, centralization, and misuse of various technologies that it can never be undone. Somewhere, an AMP developer coughs indignantly