4 ms·

And not a word about discoverability? The web went the way it went because ultimately centralization wins both in terms economics and discoverability. You host

by mojuba 2y ago

And not a word about discoverability? The web went the way it went because ultimately centralization wins both in terms economics and discoverability. You host your blog (or rather "blog") on Facebook for free and get a chance to be discovered by strangers, for better or worse. Not saying it's necessarily a good thing, because now you are at a mercy of corporate censorship that isn't even required to abide by the users' constitutional rights and freedoms. They can limit your speech in any way they like and it's what they do: their platform, their rules. On the other hand, without centralization the web is expensive and not very discoverable. Your standalone web site is like a cactus in the middle of a vast desert nobody cares about, in fact now at a mercy of Google's indexing policies. There is no bottom line here. It's all about economy and capitalism, which seem to always win.

lynx97 2y ago
[dead]
tomsmeding 2y ago
A lot here depends on how much you care about discoverability. If you want to earn money off your website, then sure, you care a lot about discoverability. But the post in question is about creating, about having your own space, about art. Sure, having other people look at your art is cool, but it isn't necessary to do art. If you want people to look at your website, ask them to.
yakshaving_jgt 2y ago
For what it's worth, I don't think Instagram has much discoverability. Not anymore, anyway. The only content you can discover is lowest common denominator stuff. Thirst traps, cute animals, influencer crap, etc.
- mojuba 2y ago
  Mojuba's law says: "Over time, everything tends towards mediocrity" :) which is exactly what you described as lowest common denominator, it's the same thing. This is true in practically everything if you think about it. Car and furniture designs. Social networks. Politics. Art, cinema, even music. At first there's novelty and excitement, then comes commoditization and mediocrity, almost like a law of nature.
  - yakshaving_jgt 2y ago
    I think that’s right. In my case, I think my Instagram experience would be improved if I could automatically block every profile which advertises a link to their OnlyFans. Alas, frustration with this experience also counts as engagement to their telemetry, so this won’t ever get better.
  - flir 2y ago
    Regression to the mean.
benrutter 2y ago
I don't know if I fully agree with your "centralization always wins" take- I think factually you're right, but that's ignoring the fact that most countries apply some kind of anti-monopoly laws that break up centralization. The internet became dominated by a few large websites not just out of economic necessity, but out of the specific economic conditions that are mostly in the US (large companies and few anti-monopoly enforcements)
vaylian 2y ago
> And not a word about discoverability? The article ends with a list of web sites that you should check out. This is how discoverability worked in the early web days and that is how it can still work. People link to other pages. The joy of "surfing the web" is about starting somewhere and then walking off into some unforeseen direction to discover new places on the web. Links were placed by humans. They were curated. They were organic. And they can still have these qualities today.
- nunodonato 2y ago
  don't forget Webrings :D
- Ferret7446 2y ago
  They were also horribly inefficient and promptly got outcompeted and outselected by centralization, about as unceremoniously as small tribes got dominated by the various historical empires.
  - vaylian 2y ago
    Inefficient by which metric?
- myzek 2y ago
  We should start a movement among personal-blog people, where each personal website is encouraged to attach 1 to 5 (to not overwhelm) link to other personal websites they find interesting. That way, if the chain is solid enough, we can bring back the notion of "surfing the internet"
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Maken 2y ago
Nowadays your "blog" in Facebook has less chance to be discovered by actual humans than any random self-hosted blog.
- listenfaster 2y ago
  This feels right. I wonder if it’s true.
forgotpwd16 2y ago
The indie web motto/practice for this is "publish own site, syndicate elsewhere" (often abbreviated as posse). Rather blog on Facebook, just share links to your site there. The only issue is comments since people will usually comment on the platform link is posted (HN is also an example) rather than on site. Though some will argue not having comments on site is a good thing.
unsungNovelty 2y ago
Do the basics from page speed index and you will be fine. Most personal websites will be static sites. Just make it hit 100 in all the four categories. Or use a theme which does that for your SSG. It's not that hard. And most importantly, don't try to swim against the tide. Leave it as it is. My website does pretty OK. And another important thing, don't worry about google ranking. There is nothing you can do about it. Create as much organic traffic as possible. Leave out all the rest.
CaptArmchair 2y ago
> Your standalone web site is like a cactus in the middle of a vast desert nobody cares about Yet, cacti thrive in the desert, uncaring about the opinions of others. > in fact now at a mercy of Google's indexing policies. Inherently, the Web doesn't carry "maximizing an audience" as a maxim. That's an expectation that the Web's denizens have come to believe in as a matter of principle: the only valuable reason to put anything online, is because you intend to cater to an audience. That doesn't exclude owning a personal website that you'd just peruse for your own sake. In fact, the author writes as much: > You can write at length, ramble nonsensically, and people can choose to read it or not. It’s about putting things out on the internet for yourself. Like, sure, there are platforms where you could share cooking recipes. But maybe that's not something you want for yourself, for whatever reason, maybe you don't want to attract undue attention, and you just want to keep them in your own quiet corner of the Web, for yourself. You might want to write for the sake of the craft of writing, and use the Web as your medium, rather then paper. Others happening to stumble on your work, is just a by-product of your choice to publish thoughts on the Web. Maybe you don't care about search engines, and if you need someone to find your work, well, you can just hand them an URL. From your perspective, all of that may sound horribly inefficient, and that's true, it is inefficient and not the right way to do things if your express goal were to cater to large audiences. But that doesn't make it any less valid an option to approach the Web. > There is no bottom line here. It's all about economy and capitalism, which seem to always win. Well, my argument is that the Web, such as it was, experienced an Eternal September with the advent of social media and mobile devices. Suddenly, everyone could reach an audience with nothing but a smartphone. And that notion caused millions, billions, flocking to those few central platforms that catered to this apparent want, creating a self-perpetuating feedback loop. Whereas, do you thoughts and intentions really need to be shown in front of an audience of billions, just because that's possible now? Of course not. Wanting to be like a cactus is perfectly valid, giving your thoughts a quiet spot in some corner of the Web you can call your own, not having to worry about likes, favorites, comments, shares or clicks. As long as doing so caters to your own intentions.
flir 2y ago
Different goals. I'm... about 14 months in this time - a digital garden, not a blog. Still updating several times a month. I think I got delisted by Google at the tail end of last year (not that I ever got many hits). I'm quite happy with that. I write notes on what interests me in the moment, occasionally I go back and edit, sometimes I send links to friends. No plan, no goal, only whim. Obviously if you're writing for attention mine is a terrible approach, but then... if you want maximum attention, should you be writing at all? Shouldn't you be on a video platform? The small web will always, I think, be at the margins of the internet for all the reasons you list. Dandelions growing in pavement cracks.
p3rls 2y ago
It's crazy people don't understand the web didn't die-- it was killed to prioritize r/SEO scammer-type content from the subcontinent. I've been building websites my whole life, but my main niche is music, and one of my big sites is kpopping.com Now I have the best database, bar none, in this niche for a decade now. It's not even close. But instead of gradually ascending to the top of google's results, my webapp has to rely on donations and subscriptions to survive because Google cannot get enough of content from the hindustani times and purple wordpress blogs. They even literally had pornography ads for months on a kpop site. It didn't matter. 20M+ a month. Welcome to google and the main reason nothing gets built. seo researcher shocked about it: https://x.com/paulkimio/status/1550532282288508929 https://x.com/paulkimio/status/1550532282288508929 my twitter rant about it: https://x.com/ohgoshnotthat/status/1894487513642791270 https://x.com/ohgoshnotthat/status/1894487513642791270
- rchaud 2y ago
  Your site covers perhaps the most oversaturated genre of Internet content: ad-stuffed K-Pop sites. It's unfortunate that content mills are doing better than you in this area, but the decline of the personal Internet being discussed in this article is occurring specifically because sites like yours monetized "content", attracting competitors that saturated the net with trash.
  - p3rls 2y ago
    What a confusing world you must live in being unable to discern cause and effect
rchaud 2y ago
> Your standalone web site is like a cactus in the middle of a vast desert nobody cares about, in fact now at a mercy of Google's indexing policies. Agreed. And so what? My friend maintains a tomato garden on his roof. Are his tomatoes ever going to win a greenhouse competition? No. Did he find it a worthwhile use of his time to grow them? Yes. Building a website should not be a resume talking point, nor does it have to strike a telling blow for 'free speech', whatever that even means in a world where the rich and powerful are obeying in advance.

by mojuba 2y ago

lynx97 2y ago

[dead]

tomsmeding 2y ago

A lot here depends on how much you care about discoverability. If you want to earn money off your website, then sure, you care a lot about discoverability. But the post in question is about creating, about having your own space, about art. Sure, having other people look at your art is cool, but it isn't necessary to do art. If you want people to look at your website, ask them to.

yakshaving_jgt 2y ago

For what it's worth, I don't think Instagram has much discoverability. Not anymore, anyway. The only content you can discover is lowest common denominator stuff. Thirst traps, cute animals, influencer crap, etc.

mojuba 2y ago
Mojuba's law says: "Over time, everything tends towards mediocrity" :) which is exactly what you described as lowest common denominator, it's the same thing. This is true in practically everything if you think about it. Car and furniture designs. Social networks. Politics. Art, cinema, even music. At first there's novelty and excitement, then comes commoditization and mediocrity, almost like a law of nature.
- yakshaving_jgt 2y ago
  I think that’s right. In my case, I think my Instagram experience would be improved if I could automatically block every profile which advertises a link to their OnlyFans. Alas, frustration with this experience also counts as engagement to their telemetry, so this won’t ever get better.
- flir 2y ago
  Regression to the mean.

benrutter 2y ago

I don't know if I fully agree with your "centralization always wins" take- I think factually you're right, but that's ignoring the fact that most countries apply some kind of anti-monopoly laws that break up centralization. The internet became dominated by a few large websites not just out of economic necessity, but out of the specific economic conditions that are mostly in the US (large companies and few anti-monopoly enforcements)

vaylian 2y ago

> And not a word about discoverability? The article ends with a list of web sites that you should check out. This is how discoverability worked in the early web days and that is how it can still work. People link to other pages. The joy of "surfing the web" is about starting somewhere and then walking off into some unforeseen direction to discover new places on the web. Links were placed by humans. They were curated. They were organic. And they can still have these qualities today.

nunodonato 2y ago
don't forget Webrings :D
Ferret7446 2y ago
They were also horribly inefficient and promptly got outcompeted and outselected by centralization, about as unceremoniously as small tribes got dominated by the various historical empires.
- vaylian 2y ago
  Inefficient by which metric?
myzek 2y ago
We should start a movement among personal-blog people, where each personal website is encouraged to attach 1 to 5 (to not overwhelm) link to other personal websites they find interesting. That way, if the chain is solid enough, we can bring back the notion of "surfing the internet"

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Maken 2y ago

Nowadays your "blog" in Facebook has less chance to be discovered by actual humans than any random self-hosted blog.

listenfaster 2y ago
This feels right. I wonder if it’s true.

forgotpwd16 2y ago

The indie web motto/practice for this is "publish own site, syndicate elsewhere" (often abbreviated as posse). Rather blog on Facebook, just share links to your site there. The only issue is comments since people will usually comment on the platform link is posted (HN is also an example) rather than on site. Though some will argue not having comments on site is a good thing.

unsungNovelty 2y ago

Do the basics from page speed index and you will be fine. Most personal websites will be static sites. Just make it hit 100 in all the four categories. Or use a theme which does that for your SSG. It's not that hard. And most importantly, don't try to swim against the tide. Leave it as it is. My website does pretty OK. And another important thing, don't worry about google ranking. There is nothing you can do about it. Create as much organic traffic as possible. Leave out all the rest.

CaptArmchair 2y ago

> Your standalone web site is like a cactus in the middle of a vast desert nobody cares about Yet, cacti thrive in the desert, uncaring about the opinions of others. > in fact now at a mercy of Google's indexing policies. Inherently, the Web doesn't carry "maximizing an audience" as a maxim. That's an expectation that the Web's denizens have come to believe in as a matter of principle: the only valuable reason to put anything online, is because you intend to cater to an audience. That doesn't exclude owning a personal website that you'd just peruse for your own sake. In fact, the author writes as much: > You can write at length, ramble nonsensically, and people can choose to read it or not. It’s about putting things out on the internet for yourself. Like, sure, there are platforms where you could share cooking recipes. But maybe that's not something you want for yourself, for whatever reason, maybe you don't want to attract undue attention, and you just want to keep them in your own quiet corner of the Web, for yourself. You might want to write for the sake of the craft of writing, and use the Web as your medium, rather then paper. Others happening to stumble on your work, is just a by-product of your choice to publish thoughts on the Web. Maybe you don't care about search engines, and if you need someone to find your work, well, you can just hand them an URL. From your perspective, all of that may sound horribly inefficient, and that's true, it is inefficient and not the right way to do things if your express goal were to cater to large audiences. But that doesn't make it any less valid an option to approach the Web. > There is no bottom line here. It's all about economy and capitalism, which seem to always win. Well, my argument is that the Web, such as it was, experienced an Eternal September with the advent of social media and mobile devices. Suddenly, everyone could reach an audience with nothing but a smartphone. And that notion caused millions, billions, flocking to those few central platforms that catered to this apparent want, creating a self-perpetuating feedback loop. Whereas, do you thoughts and intentions really need to be shown in front of an audience of billions, just because that's possible now? Of course not. Wanting to be like a cactus is perfectly valid, giving your thoughts a quiet spot in some corner of the Web you can call your own, not having to worry about likes, favorites, comments, shares or clicks. As long as doing so caters to your own intentions.

flir 2y ago

Different goals. I'm... about 14 months in this time - a digital garden, not a blog. Still updating several times a month. I think I got delisted by Google at the tail end of last year (not that I ever got many hits). I'm quite happy with that. I write notes on what interests me in the moment, occasionally I go back and edit, sometimes I send links to friends. No plan, no goal, only whim. Obviously if you're writing for attention mine is a terrible approach, but then... if you want maximum attention, should you be writing at all? Shouldn't you be on a video platform? The small web will always, I think, be at the margins of the internet for all the reasons you list. Dandelions growing in pavement cracks.

p3rls 2y ago

It's crazy people don't understand the web didn't die-- it was killed to prioritize r/SEO scammer-type content from the subcontinent. I've been building websites my whole life, but my main niche is music, and one of my big sites is kpopping.com Now I have the best database, bar none, in this niche for a decade now. It's not even close. But instead of gradually ascending to the top of google's results, my webapp has to rely on donations and subscriptions to survive because Google cannot get enough of content from the hindustani times and purple wordpress blogs. They even literally had pornography ads for months on a kpop site. It didn't matter. 20M+ a month. Welcome to google and the main reason nothing gets built. seo researcher shocked about it: https://x.com/paulkimio/status/1550532282288508929 https://x.com/paulkimio/status/1550532282288508929 my twitter rant about it: https://x.com/ohgoshnotthat/status/1894487513642791270 https://x.com/ohgoshnotthat/status/1894487513642791270

rchaud 2y ago
Your site covers perhaps the most oversaturated genre of Internet content: ad-stuffed K-Pop sites. It's unfortunate that content mills are doing better than you in this area, but the decline of the personal Internet being discussed in this article is occurring specifically because sites like yours monetized "content", attracting competitors that saturated the net with trash.
- p3rls 2y ago
  What a confusing world you must live in being unable to discern cause and effect

rchaud 2y ago

> Your standalone web site is like a cactus in the middle of a vast desert nobody cares about, in fact now at a mercy of Google's indexing policies. Agreed. And so what? My friend maintains a tomato garden on his roof. Are his tomatoes ever going to win a greenhouse competition? No. Did he find it a worthwhile use of his time to grow them? Yes. Building a website should not be a resume talking point, nor does it have to strike a telling blow for 'free speech', whatever that even means in a world where the rich and powerful are obeying in advance.