4 ms·

I don't like this approach: it means that instead of fixing the problem, we just put the problem under the rug and let a third-party centralize always more of o

by rakoo 2y ago

I don't like this approach: it means that instead of fixing the problem, we just put the problem under the rug and let a third-party centralize always more of our communications, giving them absurd power over our infrastructure. That's not an engineering solution, that's a politician solution.

oliwarner 2y ago
The reason I tolerate the power over our infrastructure is that it's completely escapable. Building and caching my blog can be done well and freely by a dozen services, and it can easily fall back to me on my server if all else fails. If we were talking about edge functions and proprietary integrations, that might be a more significant issue, but static websites are insanely easy to push off to CDN services.
- 1oooqooq 2y ago
  Wow! you can get the exact same innovative service as geocities! that's so cool and proves we are not stuck or anything. yeah edge functions or god fordid hosting something on your network to the world is too professional.
- rakoo 2y ago
  When so many replies say "just use cloudflare" I disagree: it means our way of resolving this problem is to rely on machinery that costs millions if not tens of millions to build. That's like saying it's ok to build cities and our lives around cars because you can totally change your car provider at any time and they all have your best interest in mind.
  - cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
    How about arguing against the point being made instead of your analogy, which presents a scenario that does not at all match the original one. Who said anything about having your best interest in mind? Cosplay as a lone wolf all you want, but the reality is that people, especially the sort of people that know how to configure a CDN, wouldn’t last a minute without the support of others, delivered through capitalism or otherwise.
    - rakoo 2y ago
      Yes but talking about not solving the underlying problem, just putting it all behind a third-party that is known to have issues , which is not just malevolence because it's bound to happen at its size, is the point: you want to solve the issue of how to be efficient, how to make it hostable on consumer-grade machines and connection, you can't involve the magic billion-dollar intermediary. It just moves the problem to another place and it makes you depend on something you can never control. That's not really interesting for hosting your own website.
  - oliwarner 2y ago
    Depends on the layer we're talking about. You can replicate CI/CD with simple scripts and git hooks, but hosting your site from ~300 locations is going to take some money. I'm not advocating Cloudflare because they're doing something special, it's because they're doing something utterly menial, for free and better than any one person or small company could. It's absolutely right be be cognisant of service dependencies but none exist here. They're just making a dull job easier.

by rakoo 2y ago

oliwarner 2y ago

The reason I tolerate the power over our infrastructure is that it's completely escapable. Building and caching my blog can be done well and freely by a dozen services, and it can easily fall back to me on my server if all else fails. If we were talking about edge functions and proprietary integrations, that might be a more significant issue, but static websites are insanely easy to push off to CDN services.

1oooqooq 2y ago
Wow! you can get the exact same innovative service as geocities! that's so cool and proves we are not stuck or anything. yeah edge functions or god fordid hosting something on your network to the world is too professional.
rakoo 2y ago
When so many replies say "just use cloudflare" I disagree: it means our way of resolving this problem is to rely on machinery that costs millions if not tens of millions to build. That's like saying it's ok to build cities and our lives around cars because you can totally change your car provider at any time and they all have your best interest in mind.
- cqqxo4zV46cp 2y ago
  How about arguing against the point being made instead of your analogy, which presents a scenario that does not at all match the original one. Who said anything about having your best interest in mind? Cosplay as a lone wolf all you want, but the reality is that people, especially the sort of people that know how to configure a CDN, wouldn’t last a minute without the support of others, delivered through capitalism or otherwise.
  - rakoo 2y ago
    Yes but talking about not solving the underlying problem, just putting it all behind a third-party that is known to have issues , which is not just malevolence because it's bound to happen at its size, is the point: you want to solve the issue of how to be efficient, how to make it hostable on consumer-grade machines and connection, you can't involve the magic billion-dollar intermediary. It just moves the problem to another place and it makes you depend on something you can never control. That's not really interesting for hosting your own website.
- oliwarner 2y ago
  Depends on the layer we're talking about. You can replicate CI/CD with simple scripts and git hooks, but hosting your site from ~300 locations is going to take some money. I'm not advocating Cloudflare because they're doing something special, it's because they're doing something utterly menial, for free and better than any one person or small company could. It's absolutely right be be cognisant of service dependencies but none exist here. They're just making a dull job easier.