Edit history

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine. Now you’ve waded in - so let me set the record straight.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, not everyone talks in code review and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers after cloning the repo, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to note the inaccuracies and rudely brush them off.

Both you and the dev seem to be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go to their their Github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely wanted to know more about their project and share it, perhaps even work to help improve it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy clapper for Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone else’s shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine. Now you’ve waded in - so let me set the record straight.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, not everyone talks in code review and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers after cloning the repo, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to note the inaccuracies and rudely brush them off.

Both you and the dev seem to be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go to their their Github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely wanted to know more about their project and share it, perhaps even work to help improve it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone else’s shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine. Now you’ve waded in - so let me set the record straight.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, not everyone talks in code review and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to note the inaccuracies and rudely brush them off.

Both you and the dev seem to be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go to their their Github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely wanted to know more about their project and share it, perhaps even work to help improve it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone else’s shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine. Now you’ve waded in. So, I want to set the record straight.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, not everyone talks in code review and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to note the inaccuracies and rudely brush them off.

Both you and the dev seem to be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go to their their Github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely wanted to know more about their project and share it, perhaps even work to help improve it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone else’s shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, not everyone talks in code review and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to note the inaccuracies and rudely brush them off.

Both you and the dev seem to be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go to their their Github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely wanted to know more about their project and share it, perhaps even work to help improve it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone else’s shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, not everyone talks in code review and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to note the inaccuracies and rudely brush them off.

Both you and the dev seem to be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go to their their Github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely wanted to know more about their project and share it, perhaps even work to help improve it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone else’s shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This could have gone very, very differently. Now, I’m not touching Hister with a 10 foot barge poll and will actively point people to other solutions at every opportune moment.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, not everyone talks in code review and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to rudely brush them off.

Both you and the dev seem to be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go to their their Github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely wanted to know more about their project and share it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone else’s shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This could have gone very, very differently. Now, I’m not touching Hister with a 10 foot barge poll and will actively point people to other solutions at every opportune moment.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, not everyone talks in code review and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to rudely brush them off.

Both you and the dev seem to be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go to their their github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely wanted to know more about their project and share it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone elses shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This could have gone very, very differently. Now, I’m not touching Hister with a 10 foot barge poll and will actively point people to other solutions at every opportune moment.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, not everyone talks in code review and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to rudely brush them off.

That tells me about everything I need to know about the project.

Both you and the dev seem be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go their their github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely want to know more about their project and share it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone elses shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This could have gone very, very differently. Now, I’m not touching Hister with a 10 foot barge poll and will actively point people to other solutions at every opportune moment.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too. The AI wrote for a lay audience because I didn’t ask it to do QA, I asked it to ELI-5.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to rudely brush them off.

That tells me about everything I need to know about the project.

Both you and the dev seem be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go their their github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely want to know more about their project and share it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone elses shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This could have gone very, very differently. Now, I’m not touching Hister with a 10 foot barge poll and will actively point people to other solutions at every opportune moment.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to rudely brush them off.

That tells me about everything I need to know about the project.

Both you and the dev seem be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go their their github. I didn’t abuse them. I genuinely want to know more about their project and share it.

They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone elses shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This could have gone very, very differently. Now, I’m not touching Hister with a 10 foot barge poll and will actively point people to other solutions at every opportune moment.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• How browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to rudely brush them off.

That tells me about everything I need to know about the project.

Both you and the dev seem be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived. Surprised-pikachu.jpg

I didn’t go their their github. They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone elses shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This could have gone very, very differently. Now, I’m not touching Hister with a 10 foot barge poll and will actively point people to other solutions at every opportune moment.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• Whether browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to rudely brush them off.

That tells me about everything I need to know about the project.

Both you and the dev seem be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived. Surprised-pikachu.jpg

I didn’t go their their github. They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone elses shoes before calling them low effort and shitty next time.

This could have gone very, very differently. Now, I’m not touching Hister with a 10 foot barge poll and will actively point people to other solutions at every opportune moment.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• Whether browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Hell, side stepping it would have been fine too. Instead the dev decided to rudely brush them off.

That tells me about everything I need to know about the project.

Both you and the dev seem be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived. Surprised-pikachu.jpg

I didn’t go their their github. They - and now you, ostensibly a happy supporter of Hister - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone elses shoes before you call them shitty and stupid next time.

This is my final reply in this thread. The developer has said their piece, and I have said mine.

I am a developer. I had genuine interest in this project. I read the Hister documentation and inspected parts of the repository because the documentation did not clearly answer several basic questions I had:

• How SQLite, Bleve, and stored HTML relate.

• Whether TTL or storage quotas exist.

• Whether browser-history deletion affects stored data.

• How previews differ from a real web archive.

• What multi-user isolation actually covers.

Yes, I used AI to assemble a plain-language summary and labelled it accordingly. Not everyone keeps the Hister codebase in their head, and if I had these questions, I’m willing to bet others did too.

The summary contained errors. Fine. That’s AI for you. However, if neither I nor the AI could find clear answers, that supports my point about opacity.

At no point did I request a line-by-line audit. “Points 2 and 5 are wrong” would have answered the question.

Declining would also have been reasonable. Instead the dev themselves decided to rudely brush me off. That tells me about everything I need to know about the project.

Both you and the dev seem be under the impression !selfhosted is a one way distribution channel.

The developer came here, invited questions, then turned the raw prawn when questions arrived.

I didn’t go their their github. They - and you - came here.

Your claims about my effort and intent are assumptions followed by personal abuse.

Try and walk a mile in someone elses shoes before you call them shitty and stupid next time.