move static files into static sub-dir, refactor nix a bit

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 241 deletions

diff --git a/src/_posts/2021-01-14-the-web.md b/src/_posts/2021-01-14-the-web.md
deleted file mode 100644
index cae564a..0000000
--- a/src/_posts/2021-01-14-the-web.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,241 +0,0 @@
----
-title: >-
-    The Web
-description: >-
-    What is it good for?
-series: nebula
-tags: tech
----
-
-With the recent crisis in the US's democratic process, there's been much abuzz
-in the world about social media's undoubted role in the whole debacle. The
-extent to which the algorithms of Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, TikTok, etc, have
-played a role in the radicalization of large segments of the world's population
-is one popular topic. Another is the tactics those same companies are now
-employing to try and euthanize the monster they made so much ad money in
-creating.
-
-I don't want to talk about any of that; there is more to the web than
-social media. I want to talk about what the web could be, and to do that I want
-to first talk about what it has been.
-
-## Web 1.0
-
-In the 1950's computers were generally owned by large organizations like
-companies, universities, and governments. They were used to compute and manage
-large amounts of data, and each existed independently of the other.
-
-In the 60's protocols began to be developed which would allow them to
-communicate over large distances, and thereby share resources (both
-computational and informational).
-
-The funding of ARPANET by the US DoD led to the initial versions of the TCP/IP
-protocol in the 70's, still used today as the backbone of virtually all internet
-communication. Email also came about from ARPANET around this time.
-
-The 80s saw the growth of the internet across the world, as ARPANET gave way to
-NSFNET. It was during this time that the domain name system we use today was
-developed. At this point the internet use was still mostly for large
-non-commercial organizations; there was little commercial footprint, and little
-private access. The first commercially available ISP, which allowed access to
-the internet from private homes via dialup, wasn't launched until 1989.
-
-And so we find ourselves in the year 1989, when Tim Berners-Lee (TBL) first
-proposed the World-Wide Web (WWW, or "the web"). You can find the original
-proposal, which is surprisingly short and non-technical,
-[here](https://www.w3.org/Proposal.html).
-
-From reading TBL's proposal it's clear that what he was after was some mechanism
-for hosting information on his machine in such a way that others could find and
-view it, without it needing to be explicitly sent to them. He includes the
-following under the "Applications" header:
-
-> The application of a universal hypertext system, once in place, will cover
-> many areas such as document registration, on-line help, project documentation,
-> news schemes and so on.
-
-But out of such a humble scope grew one of the most powerful forces of the 21st
-century. By the end of 1990 TBL had written the first HTML/HTTP browser and
-server. By the end of 1994 sites like IMDB, Yahoo, and Bianca's Smut Shack were
-live and being accessed by consumers. The web grew that fast.
-
-In my view the characteristic of the web which catalyzed its adoption so quickly
-was the place-ness of it. The web is not just a protocol for transferring
-information, like email, but instead is a _place_ where that information lives.
-Any one place could be freely linked to any other place, and so complex and
-interesting relations could be formed between people and ideas. The
-contributions people make on the web can reverberate farther than they would or
-could in any other medium precisely because those contributions aren't tied to
-some one-off event or a deteriorating piece of physical infrastructure, but are
-instead given a home which is both permanent and everywhere.
-
-The other advantage of the web, at the time, was its simplicity. HTML was so
-simple it was basically human-readable. A basic HTTP server could be implemented
-as a hobby project by anyone in any language. Hosting your own website was a
-relatively straightforward task which anyone with a computer and an ISP could
-undertake.
-
-This was the environment early adopters of the web found themselves in.
-
-## Web 2.0
-
-The infamous dot-com boom took place in 2001. I don't believe this was a failure
-inherent in the principles of the web itself, but instead was a product of
-people investing in a technology they didn't fully understand. The web, as it
-was then, wasn't really designed with money-making in mind. It certainly allowed
-for it, but that wasn't the use-case being addressed.
-
-But of course, in this world we live in, if there's money to be made, it will
-certainly be made.
-
-By 2003 the phrase "Web 2.0" started popping up. I remember this. To me "Web
-2.0" meant a new aesthetic on the web, complete with bubble buttons and centered
-fix-width paragraph boxes. But what "Web 2.0" actually signified wasn't related
-to any new technology or aesthetic. It was a new strategy for how companies
-could enable use of the web by non-expert users, i.e. users who don't have the
-inclination or means to host their own website. Web 2.0 was a strategy for
-giving everyone a _place_ of their own on the web.
-
-"Web 2.0" was merely a label given to a movement which had already been in
-motion for years. I think the following Wikipedia excerpt describes this period
-best:
-
-
-> In 2004, the term ["Web 2.0"] began its rise in popularity when O'Reilly Media
-and MediaLive hosted the first Web 2.0 conference. In their opening remarks,
-John Battelle and Tim O'Reilly outlined their definition of the "Web as
-Platform", where software applications are built upon the Web as opposed to upon
-the desktop. The unique aspect of this migration, they argued, is that
-"customers are building your business for you". They argued that the
-activities of users generating content (in the form of ideas, text, videos, or
-pictures) could be "harnessed" to create value.
-
-
-In other words, Web 2.0 turned the place-ness of the web into a commodity.
-Rather than expect everyone to host, or arrange for the hosting, of their own
-corner of the web, the technologists would do it for them for "free"! This
-coincided with the increasing complexity of the underlying technology of the
-web; websites grew to be flashy, interactive, and stateful applications which
-_did_ things rather than be places which _held_ things. The idea of a hyperlink,
-upon which the success of the web had been founded, became merely an
-implementation detail.
-
-And so the walled gardens began to be built. Myspace was founded in 2003,
-Facebook opened to the public in 2006, Digg (the precursor to reddit) was
-launched in 2004, Flickr launched in 2004 (and was bought by Yahoo in 2005),
-Google bought Blogger in 2003, and Twitter launched in 2006. In effect this
-period both opened the web up to everyone and established the way we still use
-it today.
-
-It's upon these foundations that current events unfold. We have platforms whose
-only incentive is towards capturing new users and holding their attention, to
-the exclusion of other platforms, so they can be advertised to. Users are
-enticed in because they are being offered a place on the web, a place of their
-own to express themselves from, in order to find out the worth of their
-expressions to the rest of the world. But they aren't expressing to the world at
-large, they are expressing to a social media platform, a business, and so only
-the most lucrative of voices are heard.
-
-So much for not wanting to talk about social media.
-
-## Web 3.0
-
-The new hot topic in crypto and hacker circles is "Web 3.0", or the
-decentralized web (dweb). The idea is that we can have all the good of the
-current web (the accessibility, utility, permanency, etc) without all the bad
-(the centralized platforms, censorship, advertising, etc). The way forward to
-this utopian dream is by building decentralized applications (dApps).
-
-dApps are constructed in a way where all the users of an application help to
-host all the stateful content of that application. If I, as a user, post an
-image to a dApp, the idea is that other users of that same dApp would lend their
-meager computer resources to ensure my image is never forgotten, and in turn I
-would lend mine for theirs.
-
-In practice building successful dApps is enormously difficult for many reasons,
-and really I'm not sure there _are_ any successful ones (to date). While I
-support the general sentiment behind them, I sometimes wonder about the
-efficacy. What people want from the web is a place they can call their own, a
-place from which they can express themselves and share their contributions with
-others with all the speed and pervasiveness that the internet offers. A dApp is
-just another walled garden with specific capabilities; it offers only free
-hosting, not free expression.
-
-## Web 2.0b
-
-I'm not here solely to complain (just mostly).
-
-Thinking back to Web 1.0, and specifically to the turning point between 1.0 and
-2.0, I'd like to propose that maybe we made a wrong turn. The issue at hand was
-that hosting one's own site was still too much of a technical burden, and the
-direction we went was towards having businesses host them for us. Perhaps there
-was another way.
-
-What are the specific difficulties with hosting one's own site? Here are the
-ones I can think of:
-
-* Bad tooling: basically none of the tools you're required to use (web server,
-  TLS, DNS, your home router) are designed for the average person.
-
-* Aggregiously complex languages: making a site which looks half decent and can
-  do the things you want requires a _lot_ of knowledge about the underlying
-  languages (CSS, HTML, Javascript, and whatever your server is written in).
-
-* Single point-of-failure: if your machine is off, your site is down.
-
-* Security: it's important to stay ahead of the hackers, but it takes time to
-  do so.
-
-* Hostile environment: this is separate from security, and includes difficulties
-  like dynamic home IPs and bad ISP policies (such as asymetric upload/download
-  speeds).
-
-These are each separate avenues of attack.
-
-Bad tooling is a result of the fact that devs generally build technology for
-themselves or their fellow devs, and only build for others when they're being
-paid to do it. This is merely an attitude problem.
-
-Complex languages are really a sub-category of bad tooling. The concesus seems
-to be that the average person isn't interested or capable of working in
-HTML/CSS/JS. This may be true today, but it wasn't always. Most of my friends in
-middle and high school were well within their interest and capability to create
-the most heinous MySpace pages the world has ever seen, using nothing but CSS
-generators and scraps of shitty JS they found lying around. So what changed? The
-tools we use to build those pages did.
-
-A hostile environment is not something any individual can do anything about, but
-in the capitalist system we exist in we can at least hold in faith the idea that
-eventually us customers will get what we want. It may take a long time, but all
-monopolies break eventually, and someone will eventually sell us the internet
-access we're asking for. If all other pieces are in place I think we'll have
-enough people asking to make a difference.
-
-For single point-of-failure we have to grant that more than one person will be
-involved, since the vast majority of people aren't going to be able to keep one
-machine online consistently, let alone two or more machines. But I think we all
-know at least one person who could keep a machine online with some reliability,
-and they probably know a couple of other people who could do so as well. What
-I'm proposing is that, rather than building tools for global decentralization,
-we need tools for local decentralization, aka federation. We can make it
-possible for a group of people to have their presence managed by a subset of
-themselves. Those with the ability could help to host the online presence of
-their family, friends, churches, etc, if given the right tools.
-
-Security is the hard one, but also in many ways isn't. What most people want
-from the web is a place from which to express themselves. Expression doesn't
-take much more than a static page, usually, and there's not much attacking one
-can do against a static page. Additionally, we've already established that
-there's going to be at least a _couple_ of technically minded people involved in
-hosting this thing.
-
-So that's my idea that I'd like to build towards. First among these ideas is
-that we need tools which can help people help each other host their content, and
-on top of that foundation a new web can be built which values honest expression
-rather than the lucrative madness which our current algorithms love so much.
-
-This project was already somewhat started by
-[Cryptorado](https://github.com/Cryptorado-Community/Cryptorado-Node) while I
-was a regular attendee, but since COVID started my attendance has fallen off.
-Hopefully one day it can resume. In the meantime I'm going to be working on
-setting up these tools for myself, and see how far I can get.