Show HN: Mechanical Computer Kit (Roons) (whomtech.com)

Cool, looks like text highlighting is a new addition in 2.10. There aren't any examples in the demo site of this, but can it capture the highlighted text snippets and show them in the link details page? That would help me recall quickly why I saved the link, without opening the original link and re-reading the page. I haven't really seen this in other tools (or maybe I just haven't looked hard enough), except Memex.

daniel31x13 · 1h ago

> There aren't any examples in the demo site of this

This is because we haven't updated the demo to the latest version.

> but can it capture the highlighted text snippets and show them in the link details page?

That's a good idea that we might implement later, but at the moment you can only highlight the links[1].

[1]: https://blog.linkwarden.app/releases/2.10#%EF%B8%8F-text-hig...

browningstreet · 5h ago

Suggestion/request:

What I'd really love is a super compact "short-name only" view of links. Just words, not lines or galleries. For super-high content views.

daniel31x13 · 5h ago

You can do that already:

https://blog.linkwarden.app/releases/2.8#%EF%B8%8F-customiza...

browningstreet · 5h ago

Ahh, yes, you can reduce it to names with a lot of columns. In my personal ideal, I've love to store a short-name for a link and have no boxes. Personally, I've always wanted links to be like the tag cloud in pinboard and to have a page with multiple tags/categories.

I'd also love a separation of human tags and AI tags (even by base or stem), just in case they provided radically different views, but both were useful.

EDIT: Just did a quick look in the documentation, is there a native or supported distinction between links that are like bookmarks and links that are more content/articles/resources?

colordrops · 2h ago

Could still be a lot more compact. Would also like the hierarchical view in the main pane.

In any case, nice project, thank you.

colordrops · 2h ago

Came here to ask for exactly this.

thm · 1h ago

I have about ~30k .webarchive files — is there a chance to import them?

dikdok · 5h ago

> Full page archival

Does it grab the DOM from my browser as it sees it? Or is it a separate request? If so, how does it deal with authentication?

daniel31x13 · 5h ago

So there are different ways it archives a webpage.

It currently stores the full webpages as a single html file, a screenshot, a pdf, a read-it-later view.

Aside from that, you can also send the webpages to the Wayback Machine to take a snapshot.

To archive pages behind a login or paywall, you can use the browser extension, which captures an image of the webpage in the browser and sends it to the server.

dikdok · 5h ago

> To archive pages behind a login or paywall, you can use the browser extension, which captures an image of the webpage in the browser and sends it to the server.

Just an image? So no full text search?

No comments yet

warkdarrior · 3h ago

> To archive pages behind a login or paywall, you can use the browser extension, which captures an image of the webpage in the browser and sends it to the server.

It'd be awesome to integrate this with the SingleFile extension, which captures any webpage into a self-contained HTML file (with JS, CSS, etc, inlined).

daniel31x13 · 3h ago

We might add this, it's actually highly suggested by the users :)

yapyap · 5h ago

Very very neat!

a question arose for me though: if the AI tagging is self hostable as well, how taxing is it for the hardware, what would the minimum viable hardware be?

daniel31x13 · 5h ago

Thanks! A lightweight model like the phi3:mini-4k is enough for this feature.[1]

It’s worth mentioning that you can also use external providers like OpenAI and Anthropic to tag the links for you.

[1]: https://docs.linkwarden.app/self-hosting/ai-worker

dennisy · 1h ago

I love these sorts of apps, but I still am not really sure why I need the webpages. At any time I do research for a topic I find more things than I can read in that session, so what are the old links for?

I would love to hear how people use this product once they have stored the links!

evanjrowley · 2h ago

I've been using Karakeep (formerly known as Hoarder) and it's been a great experience so far. One thing they're working on now is a Safari browser extension. I noticed Linkwarden lacks a Safari browser extension - is one on the roadmap?

Lately I've been using MacOS and I've noticed Chromium-based browsers use more resources than the native Safari. This is especially true with Microsoft Edge, which sometimes consumes tens of gigabytes of RAM (possibly a memory leak?). In an attempt to preserve battery life and SSD longevity, Safari is now my go-to browser on MacOS.

InsideOutSanta · 1h ago

I'm also using Karakeep. It also has LLM-powered tagging, which, in my experience, works excellently. It's easy to self-host, fast on a relatively underpowered NAS, and I love the UX. Highly recommended.

Linkwarden looks nice, too, but when picking an option, I wanted one with a native Android app.

virtualcharles · 5h ago

As a paid product, has anyone used Raindrop as well and have opinions/comparisons? And on the self hosted side, vs Hoarder?

I’ve been considering switching from Raindrop to a self hosted option, but while I like self hosting I’m also leaning towards just paying someone to handle this particular service for me.

spiffotron · 5m ago

I used to use raindrop however found it a bit bloated with features I never use, I've switched to selfhosting linkding: https://linkding.link and enjoy the much more minimal experience

exhilaration · 3h ago

I've never heard of raindrop and it looks cool but I see the .ru in one of their screenshots -- are they based in Russia? Any concerns with doing business with a Russian company, in the context of sanctions etc.?

toomuchtodo · 4h ago

I pay for Raindrop, very useful to have someone else run it, minimal cost.

flashblaze · 4h ago

I have been using Raindrop and like it quite a bit

carlosjobim · 4h ago

I tried Raindrop, but it was not usable to me because it constantly logged you out.

regularjack · 5h ago

I also use raindrop, but been looking at self-hosted alternatives as raindrop does not encrypt the data, so I can't use it for work stuff.

manmal · 1h ago

I‘m a heavy user and really happy with the speed and stability I‘m getting, running Linkwarden on my Hetner VPS. Only problem was in the beginning, importing a lot of existing links from Pinboard, the available RAM of my meager VPS was exceeded multiple times by metadata resolution. But once that‘s been overcome, it’s a zero effort tool.

gibibit · 4h ago

Is there any software that can provide verified, trusted archives of websites?

For example, we can go to the Wayback Machine at archive.org to not only see what a website looked like in the past, but prove it to someone (because we implicitly trust The Internet Archive). But the Wayback Machine has deleted sites when a site later changes its robots.txt to exclude it, meaning that old site REALLY disappears from the web forever.

The difficulty for a trusted archive solution is in proving that the archived pages weren't altered, and that the timestamp of the capture was not altered.

It seems like blockchain would be a big help, and would prevent back-dating future snapshots, but there seem to be a lot of missing pieces still.

Thoughts?

shrinks99 · 4h ago

Webrecorder's WACZ signing spec (https://specs.webrecorder.net/wacz-auth/latest) does some of this — authenticating the identity of who archived it and at what time — but the rest of what you're asking for (legitimacy of the content itself) is an unsolved problem as web content isn't all signed by its issuing server.

In some of the case studies Starling (https://www.starlinglab.org/) has published, they've published timestamps of authenticated WACZs to blockchains to prove that they were around at a specific time... More _layers_ of data integrity but not 100% trustless.

dj0k3r · 1h ago

Take a look at singleFile - a project that lets you save the entire webpage. It has an integration for saving the hash if the page on a Blockchain. You can choose to set it up between parties who're interested in the provenance of the authenticity.

aiono · 1h ago

Looks really neat. But it also seems a bit heavyweight (for the client). Is it the case compared to https://readeck.org/en/ ?

spyder · 1h ago

There is also KaraKeep:

https://github.com/karakeep-app/karakeep

Seems very similar.

ijustwanttovote · 1h ago

I'm paying for readwise, any benefits of switching over to this?

borg16 · 3m ago

it's a third of the price to begin with. I think readwise has a winner in reader app, but they sure do charge a premium for the same. You can get the same functionality in linkwarden or pinboard for a fraction of readwise's subscription pricing.

ibaikov · 5h ago

Recently started selfhosting it. I like it. I tried hoarder, but it was overcomplicated and consumed way more resources. Now it got MCP, so I might use it with n8n, we'll see.

A couple improvements I'd like: I want drag-and-drop link saving.

If I add a reddit link, it doesn't import the reddit thread title, it uses reddit's title in linkwarden (Reddit - the heart of the internet). Same goes for a few other websites like gitlab.

I'd like an MCP.

Resource usage optimization: while it is smaller than karakeep/hoarder, for me it consumes 500-950MB ram, and I have only 500 links added.

xwat · 3h ago

The only issue stopping me from using Linkwarden is that it creates duplicates when importing bookmarks, see https://github.com/linkwarden/linkwarden/issues/442

mikae1 · 6h ago