28 pointsby forthwall2 hours ago6 comments
  • lwhsiaoan hour ago
    I prefer opening: https://github.com/lukehsiao/openring-rs

    The main idea being that you don't actually need to coordinate a real ring of links to easily link to posts on other blogs that you like.

  • galaxyLogican hour ago
    Not sure I get it. Why a "ring"? Why not just have a list of web-site URLs on a page and share that page with your friends and ask them to put that page somewhere on their site?

    "Ring" means you are navigating linearly and circularly. Isn't it better to provide a list of links so users can choose where they want to go "next"?

    And why should I have to go around the whole "ring" to get back to where I started from? The Web is based on hyperlinks, not "hyper-rings".

    • verandaguy28 minutes ago
      I always felt similarly about webrings as I did about demoscene. It's less about being strictly practical and more about just a fun little thing you made with your friends. I'd argue that in this day and age, building something from the ground up to be suboptimal by design is a little protest against the quantification and hustle-fication of everything all the time.

      Having it be a ring has the nice side effect that anyone closing a ring on your site (or adding your site to it) gets an idea of how everyone in the ring met.

      It's more of a fuzzy social thing than a "let's represent social relationships in the most semantically accurate way possible" thing, and for people, I think that knowing how everyone met eachother is a nice thing. You can plan gettogethers off of that. It also keeps people socially accountable; if someone in the group turns out to be a dick, they can just be skipped in the webring.

    • embedding-shapean hour ago
      It doesn't neccessarly have to be such a "ring" that you navigate from website #1 to website #2 and the order is always the same, and you cannot jump, or even do random browsing.

      I think initially the idea was mainly around the "ring" concept, but relatively quickly lots of different implementations did lots of different things, and we still called those "webrings" even though many weren't conceptually "rings" at all, more like "lists of websites that are kind of somewhat about the same thing, sometimes". There was typically a "Random" button/link too, and index, sometimes categories and more.

      It can be a list of websites, with random order, the main point is people's websites linking to other people's websites, in some way, that it could eventually circle back somehow, then you have a webring.

    • tolerancean hour ago
      Yeah. This is it. #RollsOverRings
    • antonvs38 minutes ago
      I think it's purely nostalgia from the early days of the web, from before search engines existed. The first webring came out in 1995! Over 30 years ago.

      I think there was some sense of creating something to explore, where you didn't get to choose where to go next, there was more serendipity involved due to someone else's curation. No, it doesn't really make sense from a usability or practicality perspective, which is why despite OP, you don't really see them any more.

    • q3kan hour ago
      Kids these days...
  • ravetcofxan hour ago
    This is what will keep the web more human as we go forward into AI slop commercial web crap. Hand build your sites, talk about things your passionate about, share stories, art, things you make. And the web-ring connects you too others in the community with things you share similar interests in. This is what the web was for. Not everything needs to be about making money
    • embedding-shapean hour ago
      > Not everything needs to be about making money

      I feel like this is what keeps ruining things, in almost any hobby/sector/ecosystem I come across. Initially, as the only people interested in the thing is doing the thing because it's fun and interesting, everything works out great, people helping people because helping people is fun and the thing is fun.

      After a while, somehow it starts to bring in money for some people, others start to see people earning money and then the money-optimizers eventually arrive, sucking all the fun out of the ecosystem since all they care about is money, money and money, and tons of more money-optimizers arrive after the initial batch made their success, and around we go until it's all commercial slop all over the place that drowns out all the authentic stuff that initially was almost everything in the community.

      Seemingly non-profit groups with events held in actual venues where you can face-to-face show your disgust towards these people seem to be the only way of having communities that last for decades around a fun and interesting thing, anything online seems to fall victim to the above way too quickly.

  • heikkilevantoan hour ago
    And you need to stop telling everyone what we need! "You might be interested in this <thing> if you have this and that" sounds so much more reasonable.
  • hahahaa2 hours ago
  • amenghra2 hours ago
    Using a Cloudflare Worker to implement a web 0.9 feature
    • hahahaa2 hours ago
      Yeah seems overkill. Back in the day (1990s) you'd use a serverless script in the "Personal HomePage" language.

      These days you could do this in client side JS, mayhe fetch the static list from a Gitgub blob or one of the sites in the group.

      • loloquwowndueoan hour ago
        Pardon, how do you do a serverless php page?
        • hahahaaan hour ago
          Well, shared hosts let you upload the PHP file via FTP (or secure FTP if lucky!) to ~/public_html and serve it without administering a server.
          • loloquwowndueo32 minutes ago
            That’s still running on a server.

            (Sorry, I guess “serverless” is not a buzzword I’ll ever understand)

    • hoppp2 hours ago
      Why not. It's easy.