pull down to refresh

nsite.lol is a gateway, it requires a subdomain. There is no "real showcase," just a list of tools for a young ecosystem. Gateways should have simple homepages.

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @ek 27 Jun

What happens if the gateway goes down?

edit: okay, I guess you could use another gateway (assuming there is one), but sounds to me like access to any nsite still depends on going through a gateway and if there aren't many, they will be a bottleneck since they are serving all the content, no?

reply

Gateways don't have to be servers, they could be native.

reply
100 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 28 Jun

Native as in native app?

So I can’t access an nsite via a standard browser in a decentralized way?

reply

yet. But we can do something similar to what brave did with ipfs. Just gotta champion it.

reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 29 Jun

good luck with that

I fail to see the problem nsite is trying to solve without reinventing some wheel.

reply

nostr all the things?

I personally don't expect that it will ever grow out of its extremely narrow niche, but niches need progress too; per @Car's link of David Bowie earlier (#1018328) "the singularity [of society] disappeared [in the 70s]", which enabled the success of the Internet, which in turn "shows us we live in total fragmentation".

I think that if a group of people wants to build an alternative way of running the (read: their) web and fuck with that, then more power to them. Do I think nostr is a good protocol for this? Of course not. ws and json are terribly inefficient standards, in some ways equal to or even worse than really bad bloated crap I hope to never have to touch again, like soap.

But as a localized wish, sounds good, and if some breakthrough gets made because of all the crazy inefficiency of the protocols implicitly targeted, then that can be good for a larger-than-local group.

reply

nsite is a building block for something else; at least for me.

reply

what's it step up to?

reply