16 ms·
The OG Social Network: Other People’s Websites
- tuxie_ 4y ago> Perhaps history will conclude killing Google reader killed Google, an overly-simplistic conclusion but poetically ironic nonetheless. Or maybe it was an omen to their own decline.
- chazeon 4y agoThen HN/Reddit become the social aggregator Google Reader never get to be.
- haskell_melody 4y agoThe hard part is finding the interesting websites - there is such a firehose of content that we've necessitated a separate role for content curators. I get Thinking About Things, which points me to interesting sites on the internet (https://thinking-about-things.com/ https://thinking-about-things.com/). Another great one is Findka essays (https://essays.findka.com/ https://essays.findka.com/). Would love to hear any other recommendations.
- kradeelav 4y agohttps://search.marginalia.nu/ https://search.marginalia.nu/ is a fantastic curated search engine for just those sites you're looking for. :) alternatively, the bookmarks/links page to mine has a hefty list of artist-focused sites (http://kradeelav.com/link.html http://kradeelav.com/link.html), and the yesterweb webring has enough to get you going in the fun quirky webrings - https://links.yesterweb.org/ https://links.yesterweb.org/
- HeyItsMatt 4y agoGoogle and Bing (and hence DDG etc) are no longer a search engines, they're "information the powers that be permit you to have" engines. Forums, blogs, and small independent websites have disappeared from indexes. Large walled garden platforms like Facebook are impossible to query. We really need a replacement for Yahoo.
- Melatonic 4y ago.....what? What forums have dissapeared from Google? I get and search forum results all the time. This is not including of course the forums that have gone private or purposely delisted themselves
- HeyItsMatt 4y agoI can't surface them at all for non-programming sites. Occasionally automotive, but it's still mostly AI generated made for adsense junk. I can use site: filters on sites I know about, but I can't find anything on a page I don't know that way. Your filter bubble may be different. I mostly use Yandex now. It's not great.
- haskell_melody 4y agoWish there was something like Read Something Interesting (http://readsomethinginteresting.com/ http://readsomethinginteresting.com/) but with a search index, where you could search only the blogosphere.
- DMell 4y agoThe first item I was taken to on that list is this: https://readsomethinginteresting.com/a/baa96b89 https://readsomethinginteresting.com/a/baa96b89 Which takes me to a broken article: https://www.aaronkharris.com/asking-questions https://www.aaronkharris.com/asking-questions
- mawise 4y agoDiscovery has become the one thing that our social networking overlords do and focus on. But we learned about new things before them just by talking with our peers. I think the IndieWeb's concept of a Social Reader[1] can do a great job of filling this need. If you like or comment on something in your feed-reader, it becomes a post on your outgoing feed that people can see. This lets any individual or site act as a source for curated content. [1]: https://indieweb.org/social_reader https://indieweb.org/social_reader
- iam-TJ 4y agoWeb-rings [0] were a good way to do that discovery of allied sites back in the day. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webring
- scelerat 4y ago> Other people’s websites are the OG social network, and the optimist in me is going to riff on MLK’s quote: the social arc of the internet is long, but it bends towards individual websites. I agree with the first part, individual websites are the OG social network. The second, though, that the "social" web will lean towards individual websites seems dubious. The more "individuality" a given medium enables, the more complexity and therefore, difficulty. Most people want to just share photos and lulz with their friends, and the the landscape of social walled gardens are all trying to tap this demand.
- Etheryte 4y agoI would say yes and no. For technical and semi-technical people, most personal sites and the like offer RSS which is universal enough that everyone can consume it their own way. For non-technical people however I agree that this doesn't work out.
- mawise 4y agoThere are things we can do to make RSS-based consumption much easier. I use an RSS browser plugin for Firefox[1] so that a feed icon shows up on any page advertising[2] a feed. The feed icon let's me subscribe to the site with 2 clicks (and no copy/paste). This is a space that is ripe for building better tools, especially since so much of the (non-walled) internet still exposes RSS. We even have a handful of companies getting people to pay $$ for a solid hosted feed-reader experience (Feedly, Inoreader, Newsblur, etc.) [1]: https://github.com/Reeywhaar/want-my-rss https://github.com/Reeywhaar/want-my-rss [2]: https://www.rssboard.org/rss-autodiscovery https://www.rssboard.org/rss-autodiscovery
- klez 4y ago> I use an RSS browser plugin for Firefox so that a feed icon shows up on any page advertising a feed. Can you imagine Firefox having such a button without the need for a plugin. That would be crazy, wouldn't it?
- 4y ago
- softwaredoug 4y agoWhy do social networks persist as “gateways” to information? They offer a consistent experience. You’re less likely to be inundated with the random crap found on a random website. People prefer the mediocre, yet consistent, social media “meal” over the fancy meal with possible high degree of variability in quality.
- vorpalhex 4y agoI'll argue social networks are just a bit more than consistent gateways. They are a supernormal stimulus. The algorithm feeds you and in many ways hijacks you. There's a reason social networks are dead set against chronological feeds. They give you this steady drip of "engagement" which often means playing into strong (and negative) emotions. You don't get that in a true straight content feed. Sometimes content is boring or just not excitable.
- swyx 4y agoi will just point out the mild irony of most of us discovering this blogpost... on HN
- hoherd 4y agoRight? That blog isn't even in a webring.
- superkuh 4y agoA bit. It all depends on how you use HN. Every time I find some interesting site I add it's feed (rss/atom) to my reader (QuiteRSS). Usually stuff on HN has a feed.
- rakoo 4y agoIt's not that ironic, because the fuel for our comments is all the websites. We use HN to discuss but the vast majority of content is outside HN. Unless you consider HN comments to be the actual content, like many people, me included.
- t_mann 4y agoWell, HN comments are indexed, and HN itself links to >90% third-party websites. Aggregators like HN would likely be part of an (itself unlikely) resurgence of individual websites. It's like an interactive version of the old Yahoo.
- mattbrewsbytes 4y agoWhat’s funny in this thread is multiple people saying they are working on it. Yet HN is a common place to see social media bashing and comments about people leaving X platform, etc. I doubt the demographic here knows enough about say teenager social media usage (for example) to build The Next Big Thing in social media.
- whatever1 4y agoTikTok changed all of that. Now we have networks of interest. The individuals do not matter. Labels of their content are now the drivers.
- chriswarbo 4y agoNo idea about TikTok (never used it, or Twitter/Facebook/MySpace/etc.); however, that sounds similar to the "groups" feature of Identi.ca (now GNUSocial). I always preferred that way of interacting, since I prefer to see what anyone says about a topic, rather than everything said by some individuals.
- klez 4y agoOr subreddits on Reddit, for that matter.
- amadeuspagel 4y agoI don't see any reason why we can't have a tiktok like recommendation engine for the web. (In fact I think that's what bytedance started with[1]? Would be very interested in using an english version of that, maybe RSS based.) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toutiao https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toutiao
- bergenty 4y agoTikTok is not personal for most people, it’s just a way to consume content.
- 082349872349872 4y agofor OOG, I'd say mailing lists: SF-Lovers started ca. 1975, and I'm still on a few. (although the subscriberships tend to now be, compared to their heydays, in pour-out-a-40 mode)
- smm11 4y agoBlogger/RSS is all we/Google ever needed.
- pocketsand 4y agoBring back Web Rings and Link Exchange.
- teawrecks 4y agoAlso part of the issue: most new content that people look for isn't in text form anymore. It's mostly image and video. Yeah, they have YT, but that's not where the younger generations are. Google can't (or at least doesn't) index every 5 second tiktok or days and days of twitch VODs. Either for legal reasons or because it's just too much data that's too difficult to parse usefully. For Google's sake I hope it's not the latter.
- birdyrooster 4y agoRemember website rings? Lol
- madrox 4y agoWhen social networks started taking off, in the spirit of the late 00s there was a push to create standards for distributed social networks so that personal websites could replicate a lot of what social networks did. DiSo is one that comes to mind [1]. The fact was...people didn't care. It made building harder...not easier. I think it's inevitable. Over time, adoption trends towards easy UX, and open standards almost by their nature lag behind silos in their ability to optimize experience. [1] https://diso-project.org/ https://diso-project.org/
- guestbest 4y agoWordpress had a standard called FOAF for linking websites. FOAF - Friend Of A Friend (XML based). I don’t know if it is used anymore
- themadryaner 4y agoThere's been a big push to develop modern standards in the IndieWeb community [0]. There are two important standards: - WebMention, a W3C standard that is basically the equivalent of @ing someone on Twitter [1]. It is simply an http request to a discoverable endpoint with two pieces of data: the webpage being mentioned, and the webpage mentioning it. WordPress had a similar standard called Pingback and websites supporting WebMention often support both for backwards compatibility. - microformats2, an ad-hoc standard for adding metadata to webpages, meant especially for providing metadata for web mentions [2]. For instance, you can specify that the mention is a "like", "reply", or "reblog", and set the author name and avatar. Independent websites that add support for this can then parse the WebMention to create a comment section and like counter and readers can follow the links to other blogs that talk about the blog post they just read. There are a decent number of personal sites that already support this, like those mentioned in [3]. With enough adapters, it might build the network effects necessary to become a viable social media alternative. Right now though, those in the network are predominantly tech oriented since there isn't a ton of third party support. [0]: https://indieweb.org/ https://indieweb.org/ [1]: https://www.w3.org/TR/webmention/ https://www.w3.org/TR/webmention/ [2]: http://microformats.org/ http://microformats.org/ [3]: https://indieweb.org/Webmention#IndieWeb_Examples https://indieweb.org/Webmention#IndieWeb_Examples
- philip1209 4y agoI remember MySpace being described as "an easy personal website" back in high school. Unfortunately, it's not easy to make an easy personal website today. Personal sites take so much work to design, and most feel stale because they don't have dynamic content like posts. About.me used to be great, but it didn't get maintained. I'm working on a project to make personal websites as easy to set up as a social profile. No designs to pick - just a photo and profile photo. Not static - you have a mailing list and the latest post is shown on the homepage. And, people can "follow" with their emails. Facebook used to be pitched as "the place everybody is", but that's no longer true - social networks are getting dis-aggregated. So, I expect personal sites to become a way for people to gain more control over their audiences, and to help move an audience from one platform to another (via a "link in bio" to their personal sites) If you're interested in trying out my project for your own site: https://postcard.page https://postcard.page (Will trade free access for feedback!)
- areactnativedev 4y agoWondering if Notion might not put you out of business. I have the impression they make it super easy to publish a "simple" page (could have a database) and edit it. Has seen a friend us Notion for that but haven't tried myself.
- philip1209 4y agoI tried super.so and was disappointed
- andreyk 4y agoLooks cool, but don't things like WordPress already make this easy?
- Melatonic 4y agoSetting up a whole wordpress is actually quite hard for the average person. Not to mention they need to also first pay and get web hosting.
- WaitWaitWha 4y agoDoes Google really want to achieve their stated mission? I would like to see Search Engine Optimization ended with extreme prejudice. No search engines are immune, but Goog is the epitome of of SEO taking over the first few pages, destroying the "information" that they want to make "universally accessible and useful". I am also seeing search results where the first few pages are all auto-generated articles, SEO optimized. The content is gibberish, incomprehensible word salad. But, it is long enough, linked enough, and my keyword and synonyms appear sufficiently enough to show up in my search. Google Reader dying was a sad day indeed. So was usenet dying was a sad day. So was the town square post board, and before that the town crier. These are not blocking Goog to achieve their stated mission. It is stating such mission, but not doing anything to achieve it. Talk is cheap.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- cortesoft 4y agoHow is it possible to get rid of SEO? Search engines have to have some mechanism to determine order, and websites will get more clicks if they are at the top… those two things together will guarantee that sites care about optimizing their appearance in search results. How would you stop that?
- codalan 4y agoI would have thought a Bayesian machine would be able to filter out sites that looked too much like autogenerated word salad. Or just exclude all basic pages (e.g. recipe) that insist on having a table of contents. I know that when I'm searching for answers and the page has a TOC, 9/10 I close it out.
- lytedev 4y agoI hate it when pages DON'T have a toc. I wanna see the headings with links so I can jump to the part of the page I care about. Not scroll through hoping to find it...
- NHQ 4y agoThe OG P2P network...
- mattlondon 4y ago"...killing Reader to make Plus a success..." What? Do people really think that was why they killed reader? I strongly doubt that there was much overlap between reader users and the intended audience for Google+. It's not like your average social media user has ever even heard of RSS yet alone use it for anything. Can you imagine anyone on tiktok using RSS instead? Of course not.
- amadeuspagel 4y agoSocial media is very wide term, and arguably RSS is itself social media. There was in fact an overlap between reader users and the intended audience for Google+, lots of bloggers were invited and joined Google+ when it was invite only. I can definitely imagine people using RSS feeds for short portrait mode videos, just as people use RSS feeds for podcasts. Just as we have podcast players to consume this kind of RSS feed, we might have tiktok like apps to consume another kind of RSS feed.
- thrown_22 4y agoInternet users in 2012 are not the internet users of 2022. 10 years of devolution have made anything harder than "swipe up for more" impossible for the majority to use. It wasn't always the case.
- podviaznikov 4y agoabsolutely love the site. Also love the stats sections. I used to have it on my personal site too https://podviaznikov.com https://podviaznikov.com. Going to put it back. I used to have stats about books I've read and trips I've took. Definitely putting that back. Also will add that feature to my CMS.
- jjuel 4y agoBring back Geocities!
- emeth 4y agoRight? Browsing https://randomgeo.city/ https://randomgeo.city/ it really feels like a social network, so many random life stories on there.
- btbuildem 4y agoThe problem of the "walled garden" also seems to be a solution to the "bot apocalypse" -- unless you put your site behind a paywall or a bot-proof login, it will be swarmed with automated traffic. It's unfortunate that the defences, the "hardening" of sites leads to silos, but within these silos the very same forces (attention mining, etc) are leveraged for profit. Beyond the wall the scavengers will eat you, within the walls you're put to work on a track.
- munificent 4y ago> The mistake was killing Reader to make Plus a success. Google’s judo move would’ve been to embrace the open web as a social network. Not their network but our network. > They provide the tools – Reader, Blogger, Search — we provide the personal websites. The open, accessible, indexable web as The Next Great Social Network. I think this confuses the chronology. It's not that Google drove people away from a decentralized social web by killing Reader. It's that users had already abandoned the web in favor of walled gardens like Facebook. I think that Google should have kept Reader around largely for PR and goodwill reasons, but it was niche product being used by a small and dwindling (but fervent!) set of users. RSS was not a meaningful "social network" for any significant fraction of humanity. I would bet money that for every person who has ever written a blog post, there are 10,000+ people who have posted on Facebook or Instagram. Google could have kept the lights on with Reader but it would have been a well-lit but empty room.
- wwweston 4y agoYou're right about the basic dynamic -- convenient platforms with network effects are always going to have the bigger draw, probably by orders of magnitude. At the same time, though, the value proposition of a social networks & media isn't linear with user volume. There's always a floor beneath which the value isn't there, but once you meet that bar there's different kinds of value available depending on who is participating, what kind of effort they're putting into contributions, and maybe even value presented by limitations/exclusivity. The Reader / Blogger infra could have been an effort to focus on high value networks vs high volume networks. Which, you could argue, is exactly what the value proposition of Google's core product (search) was in the first place. Blogs still aren't an empty room, so I think the floor would have always been there.
- gen220 4y agoThe value vs volume is such an important insight. Facebook and Instagram know a lot about which cat memes my friends and I send back and forth to each other. In contrast, my RSS feed knows a lot about what content I think is valuable to consume in my spare cycles. I would never get in ad in Instagram for anything software-related, but that's at least 1/2 of my RSS feed, and something I'm more likely to spend money for than whatever cat toy they think will cause me to pry open my wallet. I think if somebody could choose the highest-signal metadata to get to know me well, they should choose my browser/search history, my RSS reader, my e-reader, and iMessage or the corporate Slack instance. Anything else is tangential at best. I have no idea why they shut down Google Reader, it's clearly the best signal:noise product outside of Maps and Search. Maybe with the prevalence of google analytics and device/id fingerprinting, they thought it was redundant data.
- Barrin92 4y agowebsites aren't a social network because they're not a network at all. there's no genuine connection between the sites apart from the occasional accidental link, but websites themselves don't interact in any structured way. The 'semantic web' or RSS, as the article mentions, which are protocol-like solutions suffer from three things. The first one is that they're slow. Standards for large sets of people are by necessity developed through collaboration, and they cannot compete with the speed of private products. (point also often made by Moxie at Signal) Secondly, these kinds of internet protocols rely on uniform, machine-readable content. Rich, personalized, app-like experiences are hard to index, Search engines are starting to suffer from this, it's a reason everyone puts "reddit" at the end of the search and tries to get the opinions of people, and why they're not super relevant in China which leapfrogged the 'plain text' internet into private platforms. Thirdly with protocol based solutions there's no good answer or even incentive to make sure the information is correct or protected, this was one of the major problems of the semantic web. Spammers, attention seekers, fraudsters and so on can game these systems with impunity, siloed company-controlled platforms can fend these bad actors off. I think each one of these is a deep, structural issue and I haven't really seen a solution to any of these by people who still advocate for returning to individual sites, and I think the trend in what people consume points into the other direction.
- chomp 4y agoAgree with your whole comment except the first sentence. When I was in a webring years ago, I'd interact with my ring-mates pretty often.
- t_mann 4y agoI would love if we went back to more personal websites, but I don't see what the catalyst would be. Google reader is a good point, it's been 10 years since it's gone and we still don't have any replacement in the sense that it's something that non-technical people at large would be aware of it. Heck, most people don't know what RSS is. Look at Wix, WordPress,... - setting up your own site has never been easier, yet so few people do it. In reality, we're moving to ever simpler UX solutions - TikTok doesn't even require searching for and connecting with friends before you get your dopamin kicks. The next big network will probably be one that's figured out how to continuously serve people personalized content without them having to actively like anything or make active choices (maybe using pupil dilation or whatever).
- HeckFeck 4y ago> TikTok doesn't even require searching for and connecting with friends before you get your dopamin kicks It is a shame this is how it went. Despite the many ills of social media when I was coming of age, the connecting with friends and sharing random comments was what made it worth the time. It was just another medium of interaction in my friendships. If I went back on to facebook, I'd still find long threads from those formative days. Now, the human touch is even further buried amid the endlessly funnelled consumption. I want to be an optimist and say this will strike a peak and we'll go rolling back down the hill to user-centred websites again.
- throwaway14356 4y agoLets not forget news groups. Google had everything to match sociaal networks many years in advance. Youtube also had video replies and threaded discussions before they made it impossible to find your conversation and impossible to figure out who is responding to who. plus was a hideous pile of trash. A 12 year old could easily design a superior experience. The turd was optimized to gather personal data and didn't have anything else. Wave and Knol looked interesting but who wants their precious workflow and writings to depend on a company that will inevitably kill it? What a joke
- sbuttgereit 4y ago"OG Social Network: Other People's Websites"... nope, not terribly OG really. For those on the early internet there were things like mailing lists, Usenet, and others which allowed communities to form online. For those not on the early internet there were still network supporting social interaction and had well developed communities. BBSs, FidoNet, and even consumer oriented online service providers such as CompuServe existed before the internet was widely available to average consumers and pre-dating the existence of websites by some years; such services were absolutely social with email, forums, and real-time group chat rooms. I developed many far flung friendships through many of these social networking services... and all well before 1990.
- roberttod 4y agoA lot of comments here like "we tried this", "people didn't want this" and "that's not where things are going". As far as I see it, the timing is perfectly ripe right now for change. People are on the lookout for nutritional, good-for-you alternatives to the sugar diet of social media we're being served. It's not everyone, but no longer just tech enabled folks either. Just because we've been going in a bad direction, doesn't mean that's how it will always go. Maybe I'm being optimistic, but isn't that what's generally needed for positive change?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- marginalia_nu 4y agoYeah I think it's a serious trap to only look for mainstream appeal. The long tail has been severely neglected the last 10 or so years, and I think this is an opportunity to be part in creating something new. Like who cares if it doesn't become the next Facebook. Maybe that's a good thing.
- roberttod 4y agoAgree. It's always a safe prediction that the status quo is what the future looks like but thinking like that only serves to stifle innovation. I for one am very interested in alternatives, and here to support anyone helping to dig us out of where we've found ourselves.
- xhfloz 4y agoI've been working on this project for a while, trying to get at this problem — https://mmm.page https://mmm.page Feel free to look at some of the pages that people have created: https://showcase.mmm.page https://showcase.mmm.page
- mtgx 4y ago
- ladzoppelin 4y agoThe quote about Google reader really hit home but I had no idea they were still killing so many services: https://killedbygoogle.com/ https://killedbygoogle.com/ Don't they want to be the biggest cloud provider by a specific year or something, why would anyone use this company for something as important as cloud infrastructure?
- rambambram 4y agoShameless plug: I have been building https://www.HeyHomepage.com https://www.HeyHomepage.com as an easy-to-use website builder, with RSS/OPML built-in for what I call 'really social sites'. It has a style creator that inexperienced people can use, it doesn't depend on external code and even the visitor statistics work without GA.
- keyle 4y agoI completely agree with the post, however blaming slack and discord for being closed siloes of information isn't entirely true when compared to the OG... IRC. Consider IRC logs. If you didn't have a bot recording conversations and publishing them on a website, you had no records either. Sure they're currently recorded and siloed, but a bot can be written to record slack/discord etc. and publish on a website just the same.
- teddyh 4y agoI made basically the exact same point as this article does, but here on HN, almost eight years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8550133 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8550133
- twobitshifter 4y agoThe article defines social networks as being the media silos of facebook, slack, discord, and newsletters. I'd argue that in the case of facebook, it's no longer really a social network. And in the case or newsletters it depends. However, if we focus on slack and discord, the important part of slack and discord that make them 'social networks' is missing from the open web and here's why: Social networks are composed of links (dyads), so an extension to the web makes sense, but search engines, web crawlers, and even 'browsers' break those links as holding value as a dyad. I might know about your website, but I don't hold any special access, or privileged relationship to that site. Anybody browsing through can see the same content and have the same access. With slack and discord, access is limited to those with a specific relationship to the poster. The same is true of newsletters, but in those cases it can be just a consumer relationship, whereas in slack and discord the relationship is bi-directional. In actuality, the article is arguing for the absence of a social network, a completely open network. That's a fine argument, but it's unlikely that most people want to share every aspect of their lives with the entire world, so the need for closed social networks will continue.
- bergenty 4y agoYeah a social network that 0.05% of the population can realistically set up is not really all that social.
- mamborambo 4y agoAlthough the rise of walled gardens was the biggest headwind to more people maintaining their personal websites, I think there is also a lot of issues arising from the underlying technologies of website building relative to the neophytes. Imagine what an aspiring content creator (writer, photographer, artist, musician etc) needs to master and navigate in order to get his own social network website up: domain names, ssl, html css javascript, image editing, comments, categories and tags, rss, pings, moderating, email, mail lists, analytics, pagerank, seo, search, translate, etc. Each with different backends, different logins, different degree of tech knowledge required. As walled gardens like FB and Myspace grew in capabilities, why didn't the blog platforms and website builders grow their design to simplify the onboarding as well? This is probably the result of venture money sucking all the best engineering talents away from the open source and free platforms.. I remember distinctly, in early 2000 trying to help a friend to create his own web site to be a museum of his life's work of writing. After trying to teach him all the underlying web infrastructures and technologies, he came to the conclusion he should just hire a web consultant. Walled gardens simplified the chores of posting online, and they do a very good job for millions of non-techies. Without this huge step, we would have lost even more creative output from the past 20 years.
- jdthedisciple 4y ago> why didn't the blog platforms and website builders grow their design to simplify the onboarding as well? Not sure I understood you correctly but isn't this exactly what e.g. WordPress did - and pretty darn well too?
- denton-scratch 4y ago> email, mail lists, analytics, pagerank, seo, search, translate, etc. I thought we were discussing personal sites. Why does a personal site need analytics? I'm not sure what "pagerank" means, unless it's SEO specifically for Goo. SEO in the sense of reasonable page design, comes for free with a builder like Wordpress. Other kinds of SEO are for scammers and the get-rich-quick brigade. Search is cool; but translate, for a personal site? Is it too much to expect visitors that don't know your language, but want to use your site, to resort to an online translator? You could even link to it.
- MaxLenormand 4y agoI do feel like social media platforms are lowering the barrier to entry to “put stuff out there” in a way that is way more appealing the to average person. I do wish personal websites would come back but I don’t really see a path towards that unfortunately. There are tools out there that make building a website easier but a lot of them are either really technically challenging (I’m talking coding your website, HTML, JS, React) or paid (Squarespace) which I get the sense just can’t compete with creating a “free” account on a social media platform if all you want to do is share some photos. I would really like personal websites to take off but I’m not quite sure I see a valid reason or incentive for individuals to do so?
- rootw0rm 4y agoOther People's Projects? i'm down with OPP
- liotier 4y agoYou down with OPW (Yeah you know me), you down with OPW (Yeah you know me) !
- langsoul-com 4y agoHas a self selection bias though. Those who don't think or write, take pics won't have any reason for a site. I only know a few people with a website, but all of them use some social media.
- dicroce 4y agoThe OG social network is GeoCities.