4 ms·
I skimmed the article. It’s reasonable, but can someone please tell how it explains the “had to die” part of the title or is that just clickbait? Also to add t
by lobotryas 7y ago
I skimmed the article. It’s reasonable, but can someone please tell how it explains the “had to die” part of the title or is that just clickbait?
Also to add to what another poster said: after Eternal September (if there was ever a milestone for this) most people on the internet become just regular users. Therefore the internet’s offerings evolved to cater to this majority. That’s ok (I guess). In my opinion the biggest issue is centralization. Ex: want to have a video channel about guns or hacking? Best pound sand because you don’t have a spot on the biggest video platform that currently exists.
- type0 7y agoSome kind of fad of writing to end your title with "... had to die", to me it just indicates that such articles have this sloppy writing style. One of the subtitles was "Growing up". The Web didn't "grew up" it just became old and we still can't figure out how to use it, hopefully when WASM becomes the standard everyone can live happily. Centralization is what everyone is familiar with. All those giant social media channels are like tv channels of the past, the Web has never gotten to it's true potential and who knows if it ever will.
- tannhaeuser 7y agoI don't know if WASM, of all things, will help the web evolve. WASM comes straight from a programmer's/nerd's desire for portability, performance, and "optimal" programming languages (eg choice of PL, reuse of code) above all, but doesn't do anything for content. In fact, it makes browsers and web development even more complex and certainly doesn't take the web into the direction of GeoCities of old.
- type0 7y agoSorry, my mentioning of WASM wasn't intended to be taken seriously *(should have used /s). I know equal number of people who would be happy as well unhappy about it.