social.polotek.net is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
This is a single-user instance run by me. I'm the only one here. All complaints about me will be sent to the instance administrator. Who is me.

Administered by:

Server stats:

1
active users

Sure there is. Nobody says you can't use the exact same software in perpetuity. If you build on a platform that's going to change out from under you, then yes you're creating software the needs to be maintained. But there are websites from 1997 that still work just fine.
mastodon.social/@Archnemysis/1

MastodonArchnemysis (@Archnemysis@mastodon.social)@polotek@social.polotek.net Also, it’s ok to pay money for simply maintaining software without a constant grind to add new features. There is no such thing as build once and done.
Marco Rogers

A friend of mine asked me to help with her website just last year. It took me a while to figure it out. It was an old cpanel install with static html files updated over ftp. It offended my dev sensibilities.

I asked if she wanted to upgrade to something like squarespace. Then I realized that didn't make any sense. She didn't care about any of that, and the website she had only cost her $15 per year. So I just made the simple edits she needed and then let her move on with her life.

If there was a thing that let her visually update the content in the html, maybe I could convince her to pay $20 a year. But squarespace has to charge $20 a month for all the shit they do in order to have a viable business. There's not much in between.

@polotek If it ain't broke, don't go broke trying to break it. Or something.

@polotek Yeah, back in the 90s/Aughts, I was the "Webmaster" (heh) for the bands I was in, and it mostly just involved using TextEdit to update the "Upcoming Shows" page, and FTP once a month to swap out whichever MP3 we were giving out for free that month.

Not really much of a point in throwing a bunch of bells & whistles at people if they aren't much inclined to use them. (Let alone learn how...)

@polotek ok, but if that website from 15 yrs ago was collecting data, I hope someone bought an SSL cert, upgraded to at least TLS 1.2 and just specifically blocking weak encryption methods identified over the past 15 yrs. My point is, maintaining security is an ongoing process that involves ongoing costs. The threats are constantly evolving and our funding streams should recognize that. Not just prioritize the latest shiny object while the tried and true struggle to maintain.

@Archnemysis you can feel free to seek gainfully employment doing security upgrades. But no, not everyone is going to take advantage of it. You can try to browbeat them into it, but I don't think you'll be successful at that.

@polotek browbeat? Maybe we are cross talking here so I am going to step away. My point was solely that technology requires ongoing costs. Even in your example of the 1997 website, there is still a cost of $15 per year that must be paid for, and I think there is value in paying for that.

Edit: $15 per year not $20

@Archnemysis I understand what you mean. We only disagree because you're still putting too many constraints on your thinking. If she wanted to save $15, that woman's website could also run on a little machine that sits under her desk.

There are reasons that software technology continues to create maintenance work. But talking about it like it's an inescapable inevitability is a choice. You can just not do that. I promise it won't cost you your job.