How does Web Craft relate to Right to Repair?

[Melooon]

Some time ago I was trying to explain the web revival to someone and I mentioned right to repair as a related action, however when they asked how indie web crafters are related to right to repair... to be frank I had no real answer!

Clearly its not just about hardware, right to repair does not just mean the right to replace parts on your computer, it means more fundamental things like the right to install a new OS and choose your software. However even that is not a direct web craft argument, you don't need a particular OS to webcraft, you can do it all in a browser if you really want.

The web is very important to me and I enjoy messing with hardware a lot, but it also does not feel the same as a farmer truly needing to repair their tractor to get a harvest done though. 

I'd like to hear from you! What am I missing in this argument! Where is the connection I can feel but cant put in to words?

[Noah_S]

I've done quite a bit of customization of open source code to make it do what I want. That feels a bit related, but I can't articulate it either.

Maybe we can repair the argument.

[Horsey Chobunso]

Right to Repair and Web Craft both relate to regaining control of something that was slipping away.

For decades cars, tractors, electronics, etc were all created with longevity and repair-ability in mind, but board room types in charge of those manufacturers directed shifts towards products that either break easily, have to be fixed by licensed (company-paid) techs, or both. Right to repair makes sure that the longevity and repair-ability can't totally slip away. It helps keep the option of learning how to fix things yourself open.

The same is somewhat true for the internet, although I wasn't really on it pre-social media to be able to talk about it from experience. The board room types running social sites shifted the internet from being a people-first, highly creative and expressive space into something more simplified, cookie-cutter, and easy to sell to the masses and investors. Web crafting and indie web services help keep the self-expressive side of the internet in tact. It's not exactly repairing the internet, but its making sure a small section of it remains untainted.

I can personally feel the connection between those, but when I actually read these paragraphs back it still feels disconnected and nebulous. I get what you mean though, this is just my attempt at explaining the feeling.

[cairo]

When I first discovered the Web Revival, I also intrinsically linked it to concepts like open source and the right to repair. At the time- The term 'Web3' was becoming ubiquitous with a collective realization that Internet as we knew it was due for a major overhaul. I naively believed that these 'collective-first' values were also inherently ubiquitous. In the Web Revival's case, there was something else happening underneath the surface. People were beginning to ask themselves how they could get more from their interactions with technology.

Could my interaction with technology / the Internet be more environmentally sustainable than it is now? If I had fewer metrics to compare myself to others, how would I change the way I express myself online? Are there aspects of the 'one-size-fits-all' approach we've taken towards existing online and selecting personal devices that are actually inferior to an alternative path?

It makes me smile to think a well-kept piece of hardware I don't have a use for could be stripped down to components and that those components could be of service to somebody else. Web Revival sites seem to have a similar consideration for the person who's looking at them. Deliberately crafted components that
treat their visitor's attention not merely a metric but instead something precious that deserves to be taken care of.

[schlime9k]

Right to Repair and Web Craft both relate to regaining control of something that was slipping away.

I also intrinsically linked it to concepts like open source and the right to repair.

This is probably the most correct answer. Right to Repair and the Web Revival are both philosophically aligned with each other.

• Own your website -- Own your products / devices
• Open-source web standards -- Open repair documentation
• Self-hosting -- Self-repair

etc, etc.

Both movements also push back against being "locked" into something:

 Web Revival fights against being "locked" to social media platforms built and managed by giant tech-corporations who ultimately own everything you post; instead you own your website, own everything written on the site, and you can design however you want allowing for complete freedom of creativity.

Right to repair fights against the hardware of the physical product you purchcase and "theoretically" own being "locked" by lack of repairability and are forced to either throw it out or take it to the manufacturer/seller, who completely control prices, availability, longevity and uses of their products.Right to repair allows the user to be able to use and control the hardware / product however they want after purchase, allowing a single item to be in use years or decades after the initial purchase, saving consumers money in the long run and allowing them to use the thing they like instead of it breaking on them juuust after the warranty expires, forcing them to shell out more money for something that should have worked for longer than that.

[Dan Q]

The important intersection for me comes from the fact that the Web is, by necessity, open.

Some machines you can take apart, inspect, understand, and modify. They've got accessible screws and well-labelled components. You can work out how they function and learn from their construction, even if you don't plan on repairing them yourself.

The Web is the same way. There've been efforts to lock it down (ActiveX, Java, DRM), but so-far it's prevailed. You can View Source. You can Inspect the DOM. Once the code's on your system (which it is by the time you're seeing the page) you can take it apart, inspect it, understand it, and modify it. You can make it your own.

I've got like three different userscripts (which are basically the "toolbelt" of the right-to-repair Web, IMHO) that run on this very forum. The other day, I took apart a major transport provider's website and repaired it, to suit my needs. I start and end my day in my RSS reader rather than on any particular websites, which is configured to show me the content I'm interested in, in the way I want to.

This is what treating the Web as a thing you can modify and repair looks like.

[alexela64]

my two cents are (also, agreeing with everything that's already been said!) that right to repair is at its core a hardware/hacking/computer related idea, but has become prevalent in so many other places in life that the concept now applies to more than just electronics.

Say you own a lamp. You can't figure out why, but it isn't working anymore, and you'd like to fix it. The right that you have to understand how the lamp works, and in that sense, know how to diagnose and repair: that is right to repair in the purest sense to me. I have seen so many people just "getting a new one" when something breaks, and right to repair, to me, is the idea that you don't just throw out the old lamp; you have enough knowledge about the thing you own to fix it.

So how does this relate to webcrafting? Knowledge of the web's inner workings allows you to regain control over how you interact with the web in your life. You don't have to engage with social media, because you know there are other communities out there. You don't have to oblige by using something like squarespace to make your website; you have the technical knowledge to understand how to build your own, and how to diagnose it when something goes wrong. and you OWN things -- your websites, your interactions. You are given choice and autonomy in this matter.

TLDR, autonomy over your interactions