Static sites are quietly winning, again
For a moment we all thought every site needed a database. The pendulum has swung back and the open web is better for it.
Static sites are the simplest thing the web ever invented. A folder of HTML files on a server. No database, no backend, no login. You write the pages, you upload them, they show up.
For about a decade everyone assumed this was old technology and that any "real" website needed a CMS, a database, and a deploy pipeline. Then a generation of small static-site generators came along, hosting got essentially free, and people noticed something embarrassing: the static version of their site was faster, cheaper, easier to maintain, and harder to break.
A static site is also harder to enshittify. There's no engagement metric to optimize for. There's no algorithm to retune. The site is just the site. If you don't update it for two years, it doesn't notice.
Most of the personal sites worth reading right now are static. They load instantly, they don't track you, they don't ask for your email, they don't try to upsell you on anything. They just contain a thing somebody wanted to put online.
If you've been meaning to make a personal site, this is your sign. Pick a static site generator. Or skip the generator and write plain HTML. Ship it.