If IndieWeb wants content, burying it under a ton of tech soup is the exact opposite of what they claim they want.
How do the developers not realise that this set of protocols is completely unworkable for 90% of users?
Please stop developing systems where the engineering is front and centre. If you want to put content UX first, you need to do exactly that, with a one-click solution that gets users up and running instantly.
If you users have to go anywhere near a command line, or Docker, or they have to hand-edit HTML or CSS, you're creating walls most users aren't going to scale.
At the moment this looks more like NerdNet than IndieWeb.
If you spend time in IndieWeb discussion circles, such as chat.indieweb.org or the get-togethers listed on events.indieweb.org, or if you spend time wandering through the indieweb.org wiki, you will find evidence that many of us share the view that UX must come first[1].
There are one-click-setup IndieWeb entry points. The most prominent is micro.blog which gives you a personal blog/site with all the latest IndieWeb goodness and costs $5/month.
But most people interested in the IndieWeb these days are devs, i.e. nerds, and want to roll things themselves, which is why IndieWeb-related blog posts can feel like tech soup.
This is something IW members would gladly see change! Adoption by non-nerds is something the IW cares about. David Shanske[2], for instance, has spent much time in the last decade on Wordpress plugins that gives you much of of the IW tools out of the box [3].
Finally, you don't need to use all of the tech to be "doing IndieWeb". Having your own domain is the first and most important step. Then maybe you[4] try making a few pages: raw HTML, generated from Markdown, Django, whatever. Then you can add Microformats. Then maybe add a script to send WebMentions, or use a free hosted service to do it for you. Then branch out in whatever direction you choose. At all of these stages, your site is still IndieWeb.
[1] I'm not as active in IW circles as I was a few years ago but still consider myself part of it: my personal site has microformats, I use Micropub to update it, etc.
Digital homesteading is the essence of the IndieWeb. Building things with one's own resources and know-how is part of it's DNA, whether or not that is acknowledged.
Because it's anti-platform and pro-ownership, content is secondary to the means of distribution. It's why it is bound to be a tech-heavy sub-culture and never a real alternative to big platforms.
Meh. “Won” who? For a long time I was sad about the lost web, but it turns out most people on social media that has replaced the web have nothing interesting to say.
I am sad about local groups and forums, but that is not something that IndieWeb is trying to solve.
The other problem is businesses that have retired to Instagram. which I find baffling.
because the ones who have interesting things to say and want to say it for themselves number many, despite being very small in the face of the unwashed masses
the people who want to overturn big platforms seem a lot larger than they really are. Think of how many people genuinely like facebook. It seems impossible to us, but there are hundreds of millions who still actively post and interact who see no problem with facebook
Three different groups of people, with some overlap between the first two:
- people with their own websites
- privacy activists and /or anti-capitalists
- almost everybody on the planet
The second group is especially loud. Which is normal, silent activism doesn’t really make sense.
I seriously doubt that people who clamor for the death of Facebook and the likes do it so that indie web is full of macha latte labubu car tastings and supplement and gambling shills.
No. Exact opposite. Opening it up to everyone is what kills everything good, the endless september of grocery store tabloid aisles and clickbait. Gatekeepers are good, restrictions on participation are good. The internet was better when it was a self selecting place for interesting interested people and not the global walmart.
This is the way! There _has_ to be friction when getting access or the uneducated hordes of the internet will spoil it. I only use mailinglists and fediblocked instances for "social" media. Mainstream mastodon is useless and just a bad parody of x or fb.
Mailinglists are great, because more and more people do no longer know how to use email or follow the instructions to sign up for a mailinglist, so many interesting people tend to gather around the lists.
Eh, I feel like the issue with this logic is that being technically savvy and having interesting things to say aren't really that heavily correlated. Plenty of people are incredibly knowledgeable about non-technical fields and have tons of things they could say about them, but aren't technical enough to setup a website (or in many cases, edit videos/run a YouTube channel/etc either).
Meanwhile there are also plenty of tech folks that have zero empathy or interest in quality that can easily get past any technical barrier you put in front of them, like the more talented folks at companies like Anthropic or Meta.
Making things difficult to set up tech wise doesn't select for intelligence or skill or creativity, it selects for people that work in tech as their day job.
You aren't getting the point though. Despite the burdens being technical in nature, they aren't very complex. There's just enough friction to prevent every village idiot from publishing, but the friction is easy enough to overcome that anyone with something actually interesting to discuss or useful to add to a discussion can overcome it in at most a weekend
I'm pretty new to this so I can't speak for IndieWeb, but I wouldn't blame them. People who seek independence from the social silos are usually engineers or other web-aware people. It is only natural that they want to solve the problem with the knowledge they possess and tools they know - and I think it's fine. If you look back at how internet evolved, it was always like this - the geeks and nerds coming up with something fun but naturally hard to get into for the regular folk. But then it would get more and more approachable until it adopted for the said regular folk.
I think the IndieWeb is at this early stage. The adoption for a broader audience will come naturally (if this survives), but for now - let them cook
First of all, techy nerdy people like things to be easy too. They're just somewhat more likely than other people (on average) to overcome not-easiness.
Second of all, how long is IndieWeb supposed to cook for before it's supposed to be ready for a broader audience? This is no shade on the IW folks if they like what they're building. But if what they're building is supposed to catch on somewhat, what's the path supposed to be? The project seems to be 15 years old already: https://indieweb.org/IndieWebCamps#
Hi! I started a startup, Known, that did exactly this in 2014, explicitly as part of the indieweb movement. The open source code is still around.
The trick is the economics here. A one-click solution is great, but right now the indieweb solves an ideological but not a hard _user_ problem. There isn't enough "there" there to either justify investment or get enough customers to cover the costs of a service.
The closest is micro.blog, which is a genuinely great service that bakes in this tech under the hood. But the tradeoff is that you can't run it on your own infra; it's a centralized service that is compatible with the protocols but isn't quite a genuinely indieweb tool.
I've wondered if there might be something around providing better tools for logging an agent's activities, or for publishing from a sensor / server / etc, but that's all speculation. Without a genuine hard user need, it's hard to imagine how this would work as a turnkey service.
They realize it's "unworkable for 90% of users" and they don't care.
Part of the Indieweb philosophy, like Libre software, is to "scratch your own itch" - no one's paying you. You do the stuff that's interesting to you. It's not a business. The point is not to take over the market.
The planet needs fewer marketing pinheads, not more. I would like it if we passed various laws that killed off a lot of the marketing pinheads, basically eliminating their jobs one way or another, and encouraged more people to create the things they want, rather than submit to the things that are popular.
The pinheads rarely create much of substance and mostly just sit around strategizing all day on how to rent seek. They have a lot of free time and money they can use to lobby the government and make it worse. They dress this all up as capitalism though it isn't really. We should strike back.
the irony is that the scratch your own itch mindset also explains why indieweb struggles to grow.
there’s nothing wrong with building software for yourself. but if your stated goal is giving everyone ownership over their online identity, then usability stops being marketing and starts becoming part of the mission.
good ux isn’t selling out. it’s removing accidental complexity so more people can benefit from the ideas. otherwise you’re not building an alternative to big platforms, you’re building a club for people who enjoy configuring web servers.
ownership requires a bit of toiling to be meaningful, though. If everyone can have something, then nobody has it because it stops being something to be had
that it was so perversely gatekept is what made the early internet so enjoyable though.
I find it all the more appealing with that barrier to entry because I miss the internet that this community is nostalgically trying to replicate and reproduce.
Its initial 7 steps: having your domain, managing your site, creating your pages... are quite accessible. There is some unavoidable complexity, such as configuring DNS. However, with interest and AI, there are no real limitations.
This is essentially DNS, every single step of the way. Hosting wouldn't be hard if ISPs weren't so hostile with carrier-grade NATs, if HTTP/S wouldn't rely on DNS primarily, if legitimization were using actually mTLS instead... and all of the things usually break because of DNS and (lack of) proper standardization.
DNS in its current form is such a shitshow of RFCs overriding RFCs overriding RFCs...and not a single moment was spent on the configuration of DNS, or a protocol to request a domain, or a protocol to authenticate a domain, or a protocol to host something for a domain, ...
At this point, I want to see the next indieweb thing be forgoing domains entirely, instead passing around IPv4 addresses and keeping your own indexes in a markdown file or something
> If you users have to go anywhere near a command line, or Docker, or they have to hand-edit HTML or CSS, you're creating walls most users aren't going to scale.
Doing a quick look over the article and your comment, I gotta agree. If you want stupid simple and content first, why wouldn't you use the gemini protocol? Pages are in mark down, no way to embed gotchas in it.
Its not one click, but is massively simple and building up tooling around it to make it easier would also be super simple.
People who aren't willing to put any effort into learning how computers and the internet work are free to stay on Xitter and Facebook. Not everything has to be for everyone.
+1. unless I see IndieWeb in AppStore and real volume of real people use it, it is all tech people toy hobbies
(which seems diametrically opposite of IndieWeb: no HTML - iOS/Android is the king, no browsers, no desktop, no terminal, no GitHub, gated App Stores, rich media, videos is the king)
IndieWeb is pretty large. And by its own design the majority of users (lurkers) is hidden behind a page views metric that most people don’t even look at.
no. you do move goalpost. you talking about public webiste, and now you need to make public entire git for it.
do you see difference between history of edits and internal documentation about the public website and public website itself? or sources to build website vs website itself? it is nuts not to see distinction of that.
>If you users have to go anywhere near a command line, or Docker, or they have to hand-edit HTML or CSS, you're creating walls most users aren't going to scale.
>If you want to put content UX first, you need to do exactly that, with a one-click solution that gets users up and running instantly.
You clearly don't understand the IndieWeb movement, which consists of amateurs and professionals who are motivated to go the extra mile and learn this stuff. The reason the Internet is the way it is in 2026 is precisely because we’ve eliminated all friction and have cultivated the dumbest possible user.
Really cool!
Have you checked out Nostr as well? I prefer the mental model of Nostr, it seems to be more in line with POSSE than Mastodon and the AT protocol.
If you don't want limitations, host your social.org site yourself, or move it to GitHub Pages or similar services. org-social-host is a free hosting service I offer openly to help you get started, but it's not unlimited.
I've done, and still do, regular blogging. I have a domain, and everything I post is mine. However it can't be "indieweb" because I used Wordpress. Hence my current blog is dependent on a corporation, as were a couple of older ones that were built in Blogger (and still exist, last updated nearly a decade ago).
That dependency is because isn't feasible for me to own my own server. If I did, it would either be virtual, in amazon's or microsoft's cloud, or it would be real hardware but still in some corporate server farm. It just wouldn't be practical for me to own (and maintain) a physical server with an UPS and permanent uplink to the net.
This intrigued me a lot! I have been searching for a way to break out of the social silos, but all the other alternatives just weren't doing it for me. They usually chased thr nostalgia of the 90s for nostalgia's sake, but apart from making me nostalgic for 10 minutes I haven't found much use of them.
This seems different. It embraces the modern web and tries to fit in, while still giving the creator full control over their yard.
I might be overly optimistic, but I'm excited for this! I will try to make my myzopotamia.dev blog join the IndieWeb as soon as I find some time
Good work! Both the explainer and the implementation! I'm using indiekit which basically comes with IndieWeb batteries included! https://rmendes.net and I'm working to get it implemented on https://textcaster.app
I feel like the DRY concern with RSS feeds is overstated. I can’t remember the last time I had trouble with automagically generating an RSS feed using whatever open source framework I was authoring with at the time.
But the unDRYness of RSS is pretty stark. It's literally a dupe of the list page of any website. I've often been frustrated at having to maintain two versions of the exact same content, and deal with XML, when `h-entry` exists.
RSS was invented just before the semantic-markup revolution (i.e. the end of table layouts). Bad timing.
I feel some uneasiness when I go to a website branded as "indieweb," and see a link to the author's CV prominently on the page. Sometimes you also see a professional taken headshot of the author or an enthusiastic description of his work history at prestigious institutions. And it's always a professionally made blog. You know the drill.
It feels like walking into a brightly lit clothing store in a fancy mall and seeing the anarchy symbol on all items. Look closer and you'll see an almost four digit price tag.
I see more simple blogs about the joys of having a blog. It’s still much better than the cottage industry around growth hacking your Substack.
A personal website is whatever you want it to be. Mine is getting more personal with every passing year because I don’t need a job. I want to geek out about stuff. However people’s websites are a product of the society they live in. Them bills gotta get paid.
A CV on your personal domain is the most IndieWeb thing you can do, it means your professional identity lives under your control, not LinkedIn's. The "anarchy symbol on expensive clothes" critique works when someone claims to reject the system while feeding it. IndieWeb does not claim to reject professionalism, it claims that your content should belong to you and outlive any platform. The headshot, the CV, the polished blog... those are fine. Locking them inside a silo that can shut down, sell your data, or vanish is the thing being criticized.
When i think about being indie, I think about the era when personal websites were not meant to be money business and the common sense on the internet was to adopt a pseudonym and never tell anyone where you live.
Having a CV seems antithetical to the entire idea of indieness.
IndieWeb wasn't born as an anti-capitalist movement, but rather at a time when protocols were more prevalent than content. If you review its core principles, everything revolves around creating, sharing, and persevering over time. Companies aren't the enemy.
To me Indieweb just another name for personal website or personal blog. Since it's personal, I guess people can do anything to their website, including looking for job.
> Having a CV seems antithetical to the entire idea of indieness.
By that logic, Indie music artist can't sell their song.
- Make it a habit to share other blogs that you love. The IndieWeb relies on word of mouth and human curation. I love "what I enjoyed this month" posts.
- Be lavish in your praise and hearty in your approval. Email your appreciation, initiate conversations. Static sites without user tracking can feel like talking to yourself at times. Reader mail feels awesome.
- Have fun! Personal sites should be personal. Allow yourself to be incomplete, to be whimsical.
- Digital gardens are great. Not everything needs to be a chronological feed. This is your space. Arrange it as you please.
> microformats2 solves one problem: making your content machine-readable without publishing parallel files or building an API.
Which isn't generally a problem that ever needed solving. Just like the previous onthologies, all this does is feed your adversaries while being useless to your human visitors.
I'm asking you out of pure curiosity, it's not an attack: what difference does it make to have a domain controlled by Google versus a more general one?
I'm not very scared; there are no precedents for similar cases except for security problems or the dissolution of a country.
Update: I see you've edited the comment. Regarding paying Google, I have no problem paying for their services. I don't know what the issue is. By the way, the domain is managed by Squarespace.
Google Registry / Charleston Road Registry Inc. operates the .dev TLD
What they sold to squarespace was Google Domains, the user facing registrar from which you can buy domains from most TLDs.
It doesn't get any special treatment wrt to .dev
IndieWeb is a form of social media. People have a certain image of themselves, and the internet helps them live up to it. Whether we're writing comments on HN, posting toots on Mastodon, uploading videos to TikTok, or writing a post on our own blog, there’s a lot of self-expression involved.
However, for a lot of people, platforms like TikTok are more appealing than IndieWeb, but for some, it's fun to set up an OpenBSD VPS, a static web server, and learn to write better in text files using their favorite editor.
A self-determined workflow can be more important than being seen. However, one doesn't rule out the other, and the Author and IndieWeb offers some good tips.
You remind me of the article "Nobody Cares About Quality Anymore" by Shawn Seymour where convenience is always valued. Or where people use information as a tool, without any desire or motivation to preserve it.
Thank you for your comment! It motivates me a lot.
> MySpace: in 2019, during a server migration, it lost all the music uploaded during its first 12 years, more than 50 million songs from 14 million artists.
How much of these are archived by third party? If not it's huge loss to humanity...
Do you think I'll just check manually every day to see if you wrote a new post? That for each and every blog I follow?
That's like comparing old school Windows software updating where you "just have to go on the website and read the news" vs `apt update && apt upgrade`.
You don't have to maintain it, you make it once then it just works. As long as your website can print post titles and urls to a document the rss feed should work.
I don't know about you, but I don't know of any native (non website/javascript) software that supports h-feeds. IndiePass was only ever for smartphones and it's fully dead. h-feed is more of a html integrated mark-up for posts than any form of actual separate feed file. This is claimed to be a positive aspect of h-feeds, not being a separate file... but it really isn't. I keep track of all the other indieweb sites I care about via normal rss/atom feeds. h-feeds were an aspiration that did not actually come about. The rest of the indieweb protocols rock though.
I looked around andros.dev and found no (real) feeds so I'll probably just forget the site in a week. If it had had a feed I'd have added it to my desktop native readers.
> Well, don't shoot the messenger. I'm just letting you know what they recommend :D
The great thing about hosting your own website is that you can decide for yourself what "standards" and "recommendations" actually make sense for you.
> By the way, andros.dev has an RSS feed.
You should add <link rel="alternate"> links to the RSS/Atom feed. The way people (or at least I) discover RSS feeds is to paste the blog/article URL into my feed reader - if that can't find the feed then I more than likely just give up and move on. All I can find on your site is a button in the side bar that doesn't even work.
Thanks for the advice, but I intentionally removed `<link rel="alternate">`. I think if you take some time to explore the feed modal, you'll understand why I did it.
By the way, what you're saying isn't true. That link isn't present in either the HTML or the JS, the URL is sent via WebSockets. You had to open the modal to see it.
First, you're assuming my entire website should work without JavaScript. You don't understand my design reasoning, nor have you asked about the underlying cause.
Second, for a modal, I should use a `<dialog>` that opens via a `<button>`, which it already does. JavaScript does the magic. Not a `<a>` as you suggested.
Finally, if it's a bug, which I find very strange because it's a very simple piece of code and no one has reported it, you're not posting it in the right place. An email or the contact form would have been more appropriate.
I tried manually typing a handful of common feed URLs relative and absolute, a firefox feed auto-finder extension, and a quick ctrl-f for feed in the source. But I guess if running an application is required for your webpages I'm better off not subscribing. That's not my kind of jam but it is understandable if your blog is for profit or it's purpose is to get you a job or something.
That's why I created a modal that explains the different RSS feeds for subscribing and their possibilities.
My blog is over a decade old, and I've never used advertising, had sponsored articles, or tried to monetize it (except for asking for donations to maintain the server). I've written freely, sharing knowledge, creating tutorials, and developing courses. Your comment makes me lose the motivation to keep doing it.
I think he just means that you should add an autodiscovery link tag pointing to your RSS feed URL. Then it will automatically be picked up by RSS readers. See https://www.rssboard.org/rss-autodiscovery.
As unnecessarily snarky as this person is being with you, don't let a HackerNews comment stop you from being an great person.
I didn't mean to imply that your blog seemed commercial. I meant that there was no need for commercial patterns on your personal blog like putting links behind JS. Things like that have justification in commerce but rarely in personal stuff so I wanted to leave that conditional just in case your blog was for commerce so as not to offend.
If that's just the way you like things, sure, that's what personal sites are for. How you like it. I apologize for implying otherwise (it must come off that way since two different people took it that way). I just really dislike the web as 'executable application distribution layer' model and try to stick to websites that are HTML pages.
I accept your apology; it must have been a misunderstanding.
I believe that in my case, the use of JavaScript is justified because it's information that doesn't require a separate page; there are just a couple of configuration buttons. On the other hand, the page is rendered using HTML over WebSockets, and what you're experiencing is the vanilla SEO version... hut of course, that's just my opinion.
Once again I will say my theory of how the internet became a few walled gardens: NOBODY WANTS TO HOST. Hosting sucks. It costs time and money. There are constantly new exploits to work around.
Yes, there are people who want their own host (The IndieWeb or Gemini communities are a clear example). The problem is that convenience is always the priority; there are no incentives.
> “Use what you make: use what you build every day. ‘If you aren't depending on it, why should anybody else?’”
Having difficulty imagining this constraint.
For example, I use my iPhone’s Note app daily for personal notes. I don’t currently host a site, but if I did I might have content/write on no more than monthly cadence, or per-project.
Does this rule suggest that I should ‘publish’ more (ie. elevate private note content to public more frequently) or build something for my private notes to be hosted on my server? Or something else?
In the first instance we’re talking about that micro commentary you get with social media sites. Becomes something like Kottke’s site. A feed of interesting things.
In the second instance you’re using your server infrastructure more, and so it’s not a machine you interact with only infrequently.
Not sure if you’re responding to my confusion (“Having difficulty imagining this constraint”).
I’m not asking about implementation of a solution nor of capability, but how the maxim “use what you make” is envisaged by the authors as a mechanism of engagement, management and quality for the IndieWeb. Why is it a pilar?
I also have my own personal homepage [1]. The content isn't that great, but I do have some curated content on there. What kind of topics and people are usually involved in the IndieWeb community? I'm thinking about joining, but I'm still debating it.
I like your website design! Next.js, React, TailwindCSS in Vercel? Is this your design? It's very nice.
They have monthly and annual events; perhaps you can discover them for yourself! However, I recommend that you first understand and apply some of their philosophy!
Exactly! It's Next.js 16 + React 18. I'm using the App Router, the frontend is on Vercel, and DNS/CDN/WAF are on Cloudflare. The style is neo-brutalist, but since it wasn't well-received in Korea, I softened it into a custom UI.
The animation is the Gooey Navigation I designed myself. I'm glad you like the design.
Today we've added support for IndieWeb to the Qbix Platform, so people can have a powerful way to publish and maintain sites on the IndieWeb: https://github.com/Qbix/IndieWeb
Qbix Platform is based on PHP, and everything else (MySQL, NginX, Apache etc.) is optional. PHP can be used by itself to host your site, including turning it into a static site, and even manage HTTPS certificates for you.
But even beyond that, it can also enable personal mesh networks without the Internet. It's completely free and open source, and designed to work out of the box. Here is the overview of how it all works:
Managing or owning your own server is already a way to decentralize the network.
You can always do it like in the old days and ask your friends to add your IP to your host file.
How do the developers not realise that this set of protocols is completely unworkable for 90% of users?
Please stop developing systems where the engineering is front and centre. If you want to put content UX first, you need to do exactly that, with a one-click solution that gets users up and running instantly.
If you users have to go anywhere near a command line, or Docker, or they have to hand-edit HTML or CSS, you're creating walls most users aren't going to scale.
At the moment this looks more like NerdNet than IndieWeb.
There are one-click-setup IndieWeb entry points. The most prominent is micro.blog which gives you a personal blog/site with all the latest IndieWeb goodness and costs $5/month.
But most people interested in the IndieWeb these days are devs, i.e. nerds, and want to roll things themselves, which is why IndieWeb-related blog posts can feel like tech soup.
This is something IW members would gladly see change! Adoption by non-nerds is something the IW cares about. David Shanske[2], for instance, has spent much time in the last decade on Wordpress plugins that gives you much of of the IW tools out of the box [3].
Finally, you don't need to use all of the tech to be "doing IndieWeb". Having your own domain is the first and most important step. Then maybe you[4] try making a few pages: raw HTML, generated from Markdown, Django, whatever. Then you can add Microformats. Then maybe add a script to send WebMentions, or use a free hosted service to do it for you. Then branch out in whatever direction you choose. At all of these stages, your site is still IndieWeb.
[1] I'm not as active in IW circles as I was a few years ago but still consider myself part of it: my personal site has microformats, I use Micropub to update it, etc.
[2] david.shanske.com
[3] https://profiles.wordpress.org/dshanske/#content-plugins
[4] Generic "you".
Because it's anti-platform and pro-ownership, content is secondary to the means of distribution. It's why it is bound to be a tech-heavy sub-culture and never a real alternative to big platforms.
I am sad about local groups and forums, but that is not something that IndieWeb is trying to solve.
The other problem is businesses that have retired to Instagram. which I find baffling.
How does having their own place away from the “unwashed masses” relate to overturning the big platforms?
I seriously doubt that people who clamor for the death of Facebook and the likes do it so that indie web is full of macha latte labubu car tastings and supplement and gambling shills.
<https://wist.info/krutch-joseph-wood/53557/>
Mailinglists are great, because more and more people do no longer know how to use email or follow the instructions to sign up for a mailinglist, so many interesting people tend to gather around the lists.
Meanwhile there are also plenty of tech folks that have zero empathy or interest in quality that can easily get past any technical barrier you put in front of them, like the more talented folks at companies like Anthropic or Meta.
Making things difficult to set up tech wise doesn't select for intelligence or skill or creativity, it selects for people that work in tech as their day job.
I think the IndieWeb is at this early stage. The adoption for a broader audience will come naturally (if this survives), but for now - let them cook
Second of all, how long is IndieWeb supposed to cook for before it's supposed to be ready for a broader audience? This is no shade on the IW folks if they like what they're building. But if what they're building is supposed to catch on somewhat, what's the path supposed to be? The project seems to be 15 years old already: https://indieweb.org/IndieWebCamps#
If something is important for me I can waste hours setting it up and running.
If it is something new to me, if it doesn’t work out of the box I most likely will just move on.
The trick is the economics here. A one-click solution is great, but right now the indieweb solves an ideological but not a hard _user_ problem. There isn't enough "there" there to either justify investment or get enough customers to cover the costs of a service.
The closest is micro.blog, which is a genuinely great service that bakes in this tech under the hood. But the tradeoff is that you can't run it on your own infra; it's a centralized service that is compatible with the protocols but isn't quite a genuinely indieweb tool.
I've wondered if there might be something around providing better tools for logging an agent's activities, or for publishing from a sensor / server / etc, but that's all speculation. Without a genuine hard user need, it's hard to imagine how this would work as a turnkey service.
Part of the Indieweb philosophy, like Libre software, is to "scratch your own itch" - no one's paying you. You do the stuff that's interesting to you. It's not a business. The point is not to take over the market.
The planet needs fewer marketing pinheads, not more. I would like it if we passed various laws that killed off a lot of the marketing pinheads, basically eliminating their jobs one way or another, and encouraged more people to create the things they want, rather than submit to the things that are popular.
The pinheads rarely create much of substance and mostly just sit around strategizing all day on how to rent seek. They have a lot of free time and money they can use to lobby the government and make it worse. They dress this all up as capitalism though it isn't really. We should strike back.
No, you don't understand, it's bad because it does not provide ""value""
there’s nothing wrong with building software for yourself. but if your stated goal is giving everyone ownership over their online identity, then usability stops being marketing and starts becoming part of the mission.
good ux isn’t selling out. it’s removing accidental complexity so more people can benefit from the ideas. otherwise you’re not building an alternative to big platforms, you’re building a club for people who enjoy configuring web servers.
I find it all the more appealing with that barrier to entry because I miss the internet that this community is nostalgically trying to replicate and reproduce.
This is essentially DNS, every single step of the way. Hosting wouldn't be hard if ISPs weren't so hostile with carrier-grade NATs, if HTTP/S wouldn't rely on DNS primarily, if legitimization were using actually mTLS instead... and all of the things usually break because of DNS and (lack of) proper standardization.
DNS in its current form is such a shitshow of RFCs overriding RFCs overriding RFCs...and not a single moment was spent on the configuration of DNS, or a protocol to request a domain, or a protocol to authenticate a domain, or a protocol to host something for a domain, ...
/nerdrage
Oh, no?
Its not one click, but is massively simple and building up tooling around it to make it easier would also be super simple.
(which seems diametrically opposite of IndieWeb: no HTML - iOS/Android is the king, no browsers, no desktop, no terminal, no GitHub, gated App Stores, rich media, videos is the king)
It does keep indieweb for the few and not the many.
use Cloudflare.
https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/22817
whatever critisism is just "IndieWeb decides not to do so".
not admiting own mistakes also goes hand-in-hand with it.
overall, recipe for disaster.
do you see difference between history of edits and internal documentation about the public website and public website itself? or sources to build website vs website itself? it is nuts not to see distinction of that.
github repo != public webpage. this is nuts.
They, if you're lucky, may have "davethepublumber.co.uk" and then "[email protected]" printed on the side
Or at least they won't enjoy it.
Physical activity is enjoyable for most people, whereas mental is painful.
Some examples of that exist for sure.
If it's turnkey it can't be "self". Even if you could buy a magic hosting box to put in your home network, you would be dependent on its support.
>If you want to put content UX first, you need to do exactly that, with a one-click solution that gets users up and running instantly.
You clearly don't understand the IndieWeb movement, which consists of amateurs and professionals who are motivated to go the extra mile and learn this stuff. The reason the Internet is the way it is in 2026 is precisely because we’ve eliminated all friction and have cultivated the dumbest possible user.
> If you don't update your social.org at least once a month, you will lose the domain and the nickname will be released
I usually don't post once a month. Nickname released, that's a security problem.
Looks as if: org-social.org is a single point of failure? Hmm
I wonder if there's ways to solve those problems. Maybe you'd end up w sth like AT Proto in the end
That dependency is because isn't feasible for me to own my own server. If I did, it would either be virtual, in amazon's or microsoft's cloud, or it would be real hardware but still in some corporate server farm. It just wouldn't be practical for me to own (and maintain) a physical server with an UPS and permanent uplink to the net.
This seems different. It embraces the modern web and tries to fit in, while still giving the creator full control over their yard.
I might be overly optimistic, but I'm excited for this! I will try to make my myzopotamia.dev blog join the IndieWeb as soon as I find some time
RSS was invented just before the semantic-markup revolution (i.e. the end of table layouts). Bad timing.
It feels like walking into a brightly lit clothing store in a fancy mall and seeing the anarchy symbol on all items. Look closer and you'll see an almost four digit price tag.
A personal website is whatever you want it to be. Mine is getting more personal with every passing year because I don’t need a job. I want to geek out about stuff. However people’s websites are a product of the society they live in. Them bills gotta get paid.
Why is that so bad? My professional life is a part of who I am. One could call me an IndieWorker, in that I'm self employed....
Having a CV seems antithetical to the entire idea of indieness.
> Having a CV seems antithetical to the entire idea of indieness.
By that logic, Indie music artist can't sell their song.
A few things I would add:
- Make it a habit to share other blogs that you love. The IndieWeb relies on word of mouth and human curation. I love "what I enjoyed this month" posts.
- Be lavish in your praise and hearty in your approval. Email your appreciation, initiate conversations. Static sites without user tracking can feel like talking to yourself at times. Reader mail feels awesome.
- Have fun! Personal sites should be personal. Allow yourself to be incomplete, to be whimsical.
- Digital gardens are great. Not everything needs to be a chronological feed. This is your space. Arrange it as you please.
Which isn't generally a problem that ever needed solving. Just like the previous onthologies, all this does is feed your adversaries while being useless to your human visitors.
Also, many people (apparently not you) are uncomfortable giving money to Google.
Google also ends up with some limited information about who is accessing your website.
Update: I see you've edited the comment. Regarding paying Google, I have no problem paying for their services. I don't know what the issue is. By the way, the domain is managed by Squarespace.
What they sold to squarespace was Google Domains, the user facing registrar from which you can buy domains from most TLDs. It doesn't get any special treatment wrt to .dev
However, for a lot of people, platforms like TikTok are more appealing than IndieWeb, but for some, it's fun to set up an OpenBSD VPS, a static web server, and learn to write better in text files using their favorite editor.
A self-determined workflow can be more important than being seen. However, one doesn't rule out the other, and the Author and IndieWeb offers some good tips.
Thanks for the post.
Thank you for your comment! It motivates me a lot.
How much of these are archived by third party? If not it's huge loss to humanity...
This made me smile and I agree.
Man was I bummed.
What is the advantage to me of maintaining an rss?
Is there some giant rss feed following community I’m missing?
https://blog.chromium.org/2021/05/an-experiment-in-helping-u...
It seems they killed it in 2025, maybe to make space for the AI button.
Yes
That's like comparing old school Windows software updating where you "just have to go on the website and read the news" vs `apt update && apt upgrade`.
I looked around andros.dev and found no (real) feeds so I'll probably just forget the site in a week. If it had had a feed I'd have added it to my desktop native readers.
By the way, andros.dev has an RSS feed.
The great thing about hosting your own website is that you can decide for yourself what "standards" and "recommendations" actually make sense for you.
> By the way, andros.dev has an RSS feed.
You should add <link rel="alternate"> links to the RSS/Atom feed. The way people (or at least I) discover RSS feeds is to paste the blog/article URL into my feed reader - if that can't find the feed then I more than likely just give up and move on. All I can find on your site is a button in the side bar that doesn't even work.
Had to look at the page source to find it, since without JS, the bottom left button does nothing.
Second, for a modal, I should use a `<dialog>` that opens via a `<button>`, which it already does. JavaScript does the magic. Not a `<a>` as you suggested.
Finally, if it's a bug, which I find very strange because it's a very simple piece of code and no one has reported it, you're not posting it in the right place. An email or the contact form would have been more appropriate.
As unnecessarily snarky as this person is being with you, don't let a HackerNews comment stop you from being an great person.
If that's just the way you like things, sure, that's what personal sites are for. How you like it. I apologize for implying otherwise (it must come off that way since two different people took it that way). I just really dislike the web as 'executable application distribution layer' model and try to stick to websites that are HTML pages.
I believe that in my case, the use of JavaScript is justified because it's information that doesn't require a separate page; there are just a couple of configuration buttons. On the other hand, the page is rendered using HTML over WebSockets, and what you're experiencing is the vanilla SEO version... hut of course, that's just my opinion.
Then I get my electricity bill
Having difficulty imagining this constraint.
For example, I use my iPhone’s Note app daily for personal notes. I don’t currently host a site, but if I did I might have content/write on no more than monthly cadence, or per-project.
Does this rule suggest that I should ‘publish’ more (ie. elevate private note content to public more frequently) or build something for my private notes to be hosted on my server? Or something else?
In the first instance we’re talking about that micro commentary you get with social media sites. Becomes something like Kottke’s site. A feed of interesting things.
In the second instance you’re using your server infrastructure more, and so it’s not a machine you interact with only infrequently.
Or am I totally missing the point?
Not sure if you’re responding to my confusion (“Having difficulty imagining this constraint”).
I’m not asking about implementation of a solution nor of capability, but how the maxim “use what you make” is envisaged by the authors as a mechanism of engagement, management and quality for the IndieWeb. Why is it a pilar?
[1] https://www.makonea.com/en-US
They have monthly and annual events; perhaps you can discover them for yourself! However, I recommend that you first understand and apply some of their philosophy!
The animation is the Gooey Navigation I designed myself. I'm glad you like the design.
Qbix Platform is based on PHP, and everything else (MySQL, NginX, Apache etc.) is optional. PHP can be used by itself to host your site, including turning it into a static site, and even manage HTTPS certificates for you.
But even beyond that, it can also enable personal mesh networks without the Internet. It's completely free and open source, and designed to work out of the box. Here is the overview of how it all works:
https://qbix.com/server.html
Anyone can go right now to a DNS registry and set up a url with tld and as many redirects as needed and host locally or remote servers.