• finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Couldn’t this be much different if “web 2.0” hadn’t taken over?

    Probably not, even if you have time to maintain your site by updating it occasionally then it still falls upon individuals to fund the hosting services and hold the domain name. Even Hexbear’s domain wound up for auction a little while back because they forgot to pay their bills.

    Many of them are still alive but don’t get the exposure they deserve because of centralized networks.

    Since Net Neutrality has been off and on enforced, it’s generally been considered illegal to block, hide, or throttle traffic, but I agree those small sites didn’t get as much search indexing unless they paid for ads.

    • tfm@europe.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Net neutrality

      To my knowledge net neutrality only covers internet providers and not search engines or other platforms.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Your precise wording was “centralized networks” which I interpreted as the ISP providing traffic between you and other services. Perhaps you meant monopoly?

        • tfm@europe.pubOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          No I mean the big social Networks with centralized management. Like Reddit, Facebook,…