free software resistance

 the cost of computing freedom is eternal vigilance

### the-web-really-sucks *originally posted:* nov 2023 yes, its technically a webpage saying this. the page is written in gemtext, to the point where if you download this page and look at it in a text editor, with or without javascript support- you will get mostly gemtext. if you do have javascript support, the page will translate itself into html so the browser can show it. i have no desire to create webpages. the web is bloated and complex beyond good design. of course this has applications, if you give a document system enough features to where its turing complete, you can do countless things with that. though turing completeness doesnt necessarily mean good design. if we simply use gemini instead, support that is still increasing, dwindles. there are more webhosts than gemhosts. there are more people for now, who want a bloated web design than who want gemini or even a simplified webpage. though less popular doesnt necessarily mean a bad design. a web browser that only supported limited features, compared to the full set prescribed today, would be welcome by many. it depends on which limited features, and it would be difficult to take over the mainstream and make most people happy. designs that exploit or otherwise take something away from users can be addictive. for everything you lose to the modern web, it can be made very pleasing aesthetically. the web is extremely flexible, as long as you are willing to make sacrifices for it. but it has reached the point where one or two browser projects can essentially hijack the development of all others- and hijack the resources needed to support a giant browser. browsers are still forkable by small teams, but it becomes less and less practical to do this even as it becomes more and more important to do so. webpages in general become another avenue for exploiting users with surveillance, bloat and malware. the web becomes another platform that needs to be routinely secured, scanned and mitigated. user control of that platform, where the user truly has a say what happens on their computer, becomes less and less likely. but as with any other program, it is often the minority who cares about this, or the fringe that is willing to do something about it. we should nonetheless recognise the importance of creating options here. we should resist the web, for the things it does that we either dont control or simply dont want in our computing. the more bloated something gets, the less control we tend to have over it. my general thesis, which i do not believe originated with me but which doesnt get enough recognition regardless of its genesis, is that this fact is weaponised against users. for users to control their computing, they must put some kind of limit on developers. if developers have more say on what browsing means than users do- and, if development becomes consolidated around one or two browsers where it used to be possible to have many more (not just rebrands and toolkit adaptations, but greater diversity in approach and goals) then our choices become more superficial- more like a duopoly, if even that. the control is more top-down than grassroots. this has implications for self expression via webpages that are obvious to some. mitigations are many and some of those mitigations are great! though even filtering content is such a chore to do that tools which are good at it routinely get taken over, or lose their original goals, or abandon their integrity. im in favour of such tools, but also in examining the paths such projects take. the best way to have more options is to use more options- by design, gemtext cant do everything the web can do. MOST things cant do everything the web can do. but for simpler tools to flourish, requires that simpler tools be used. we can reduce the number of bloated websites created, by participating differently. for some, that means abandoning the web as much as possible. for others, that means mitigating the web to a point. more people will adopt a mixed approach. reducing the monopoly or the duopoly increases the level of freedom. i dont like the web, because its easy to focus on the negative aspects of it- these negatives tend to mostly increase. i dont think reform will solve this, i dont think simpler websites are "the" answer to this problem, though i think theyre better than nothing. this is being said on a simpler website- its intended as a step forward, and many people will say its a bigger step to get rid of javascript. i think we should reduce our dependency on the web, and steps in that direction are a good start. once we do that, we should continue to move towards alternatives, though in some ways first steps are the biggest. in other ways, first steps are the easiest. they dont require as much commitment. whatever you do, you can help. i dont think any one-size-fits-all approach is going to work, freedom is better at using many tools to get jobs done than creating a one-size-fits-all approach, because when you have actually have freedom it becomes much clearer than one size doesnt fit all. freedom is more important than choices, but freedom tends to lead to an increase in choices. if choices are really dwindling, that can be an early indicator that freedom is dwindling as well. as a maxim this doesnt always work out the same way. if we work together when its reasonable to do so, it will limit our choices to some degree- it wont typically be 100 people with 100 different tools, if those people are collaborating to make tools that suit more than one person. we probably also want some level of standardisation between our solutions- tcp/ip is very flexible, it can be used in so many ways to do so many different things. it can be used to do web, or gemini, or countless other things. but we dont complain about it the way many people complain about the web. tcp/ip doesnt really stand in our way. so while we almost certainly want diversity, that isnt the only metric to measure freedom by. we still dont want any group of people to control our computing- we want to retain a certain level of control of our computing for ourselves, and then move forward- not farther and farther away from choices, options and forkability. we want the freedom to modify. thats pretty difficult if the requirements of modified software become too much of a burden- or if something extremely demanding (tcp/ip for example is not extremely demanding, on the contrary) becomes the one-size-fits-all solution. if you are trying to have more freedom, you should start by trying to find, and trying to apply, more than one solution to everything. where everyone is doing the same thing in the same way with the same software, sometimes its good to use a solution that is more modest in its design, and its requirements. that will lead to a greater diversity of solutions in practice, because smaller more modest tools (by design) cannot do everything without other, smaller and more modest tools to pick up the slack created by a design that is reasonably modest. the web simply isnt like that anymore. it is large, it presumes much, and it consolidates power among those with the resources to tame it- and the ultimately the incentive to make things even worse. license: 0-clause bsd ``` # 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 # # Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any # purpose with or without fee is hereby granted. # # THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE AUTHOR DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES # WITH REGARD TO THIS SOFTWARE INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF # MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR BE LIABLE FOR # ANY SPECIAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES # WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN # ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF # OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE. ``` => https://freesoftwareresistance.neocities.org