Simplicity of IRC • Hacker News Board

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#141

Post by anthk » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 5:45 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #133

dan-robertson wrote: post #6

It’s a real shame how difficult programming is. I don’t mean that it is difficult to write difficult things, but that it is difficult to write simple things. Once upon a time, one could download visual studio, click about to make a new project in (e.g.) Visual Basic, draw a gui in the gui editor, and click the run button. One could then start adding simple functionality (e.g. working through a book). Or even longer a…

Reminds me of this visualization[1]. The amount of code it takes to simply draw a triangle in OpenGL 1.x, OpenGL 3+, and Vulcan The learning curve has been sacrificed. It's now a learning cliff for everything. We've used to have computers that make it simple to do simple things and hard to do complex things. Now, just so it can be slightly less hard to do complex things, we've made it hard to learn and do simple thin…

TBH GLIDE was the Vulkan of its era.

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#142

Post by progval » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 5:48 PM UTC

jokoon wrote: post #87

I love IRC, unfortunately it doesn't work properly with smartphones because they have a "loose" connectivity (4G towers data etc). I'm not sure IRC apps can deal with this already. It would be nice to have some update to the IRC RFC. If it was well supported for smartphones, I'm still wondering if it would cause some bandwidth costs to servers. EDIT: I know about bouncers, but I would prefer to do without.

> I'm not sure IRC apps can deal with this already. It would be nice to have some update to the IRC RFC.

They can do it with some help from the IRC server: https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/chathistory + https://github.com/ergochat/ergo/blob/master/docs/USERGUIDE....

If the server itself doesn't support it, you'll need to add a bouncer inbetween, which is still very common, unfortunately.

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#143

Post by janc_ » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 5:49 PM UTC

hiptobecubic wrote: post #32

lambdaba wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty nice indeed. I like the use of keywords for sizes "thin", "large", and the shorthand hex for colors, and the fact that there's zero boilerplate and only styling what's actually used.

Agreed, but I hate this: a:link, a:visited { color: #00e; } Why do this?

Fortunately that’s easy to override with some custom CSS, but I also don’t understand the reasoning behind that…

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#144

Post by agumonkey » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 5:51 PM UTC

I still have discord somewhere.. but I don't use it. I think the technical simplicity of IRC also leads to chiller chans (and I know there are toxic people on IRC but it feels like an open garden unlike tiny realms with a lot of efforts put in setting up servers and rules by the original team)

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#145

Post by mrweasel » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 5:52 PM UTC

u801e wrote: post #117

mrweasel wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fall of Usenet more and more looks like a mistake. I’d love to have hyper-localized newsgroups, in place of Facebook. Often local stuff like: “Why does is smell like somethings on fire”, “Has the water been turned of” or is “Is soccer cancelled this week?” is only posted on Facebook. So if you don’t have Facebook, you can’t get those information. Then again the Facebook algorithm will hide it for three weeks befo…

Some newsgroup messages have a distribution header. But I don't really recall that feature being used at all during the time I was on Usenet (late '90s till about 7 years ago).

I was just suggesting having a group or two for your town, rather than just having them for major cities.

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#146

Post by DogLover_ » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 5:57 PM UTC

akpa1 wrote: post #66

DogLover_ wrote: post #59

I used IRC for gaming around 2004 - fond memories! I recently tried Discord to find programming communities but I just don't get it. When you join a server you are automatically subscribed to all the channels. And apparently you can't leave them, you can only 'silence' them by manually doing that for each channel. After a few days I just gave up as I could not keep up with all the notifications.

Discord does allow you to set notifications across an entire community to "all messages" (which is the default), "only mentions" or "nothing" if you right-click on the community icon.

I was not precise when I said notifications. I already set it to "only mentions". My problem was that each channel will "light-up" when anyone is commenting in them. I have to mute each channel or mark all as read for the whole server to avoid this. On IRC you opt in to channels.

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#147

Post by majkinetor » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 6:01 PM UTC

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #80

fivea wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Windows comes with PowerShell (...) It might be just me, but PowerShell feels outright developer-hostile even when compared to Bash. Perhaps it's their approach to rely primarily on .NET stuff which makes things so arcane, but when given the option it's far simpler and better to go with, say, python than PowerShell.

I couldn't disagree more, I think bash is a horrifically bad programming language. Honestly I'm incredibly surprised anyone could compare PowerShell and bash and think that PowerShell is the arcane one.

Totally. Bash is such nonsense. Its little better then batch on Windows.

PowerShell is such joy that it should be there on any Linux as default interactive shell.

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#148

Post by throwhauser » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 6:01 PM UTC

Iv wrote: post #38

dan-robertson wrote: post #6

It’s a real shame how difficult programming is. I don’t mean that it is difficult to write difficult things, but that it is difficult to write simple things. Once upon a time, one could download visual studio, click about to make a new project in (e.g.) Visual Basic, draw a gui in the gui editor, and click the run button. One could then start adding simple functionality (e.g. working through a book). Or even longer a…

> on windows This is the mistake. Linux and, I believe, OSX come with several tools pre-installed including python.

Anytime I do anything with python on Linux or MacOS I encounter python, python3, pip, pip3, venv, virtualenv, conda, poetry... so much machinery around the code. Throw in your platform-specifc package manager of choice as well (apt, brew, etc)

EDIT: Oh and pipenv!

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#149

Post by tl » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 6:02 PM UTC

efdee wrote: post #119

lloeki wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is, unless the enterprise has policies to abide by disallowing API calls, in which case you're stuck with the official client and vetted integrations. Same for mobile, the advantage vanishes once enterprise requires your (usually personal) phone to be surrendered to corp IT via MDM (which I sure as hell won't do). The whole value proposition of Slack and Teams for their customers is control.

> That is, unless the enterprise has policies to abide by disallowing API calls ...What?

Welcome to enterprise, where breaking things is a feature so commonly used Microsoft has documentation for it [1] and things are often deployed by people whose sole concern is "minimize attack surfaces". Our Teams installation not only disables API calls (official Teams client only), chat sessions are deleted if no one posts to them meaning most chat history is lost every weekend.

[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/office365/troubleshoot/acce...

Microsoft uses these anti-features as a selling point, and in a large enough organization, it's not immediately clear who turned them on or who can turn them off.

Re: Simplicity of IRC

#150

Post by majkinetor » Sun, Jan 09, 2022, 6:02 PM UTC

fivea wrote: post #113

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't disagree more, I think bash is a horrifically bad programming language. Honestly I'm incredibly surprised anyone could compare PowerShell and bash and think that PowerShell is the arcane one.

> I couldn't disagree more, I think bash is a horrifically bad programming language. Bash is described as a "command language" and not a programming language per se. Bash is what you use to type in commands, and automate said commands if you need to whip out a quick script that runs what you would otherwise run manually. Bash, scripting-wise, is command line glue. If all you want to do is run commands with some logic…

No post body was provided.