Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Fediverse deserves a dumb graphical client

adele.pages.casa

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 21 posts

Re: The Fediverse deserves a dumb graphical client

#2

Post by superkuh »

It really does. But also, having to do this points out a glaring flaw in the design of the fediverse websites. They're applications and not documents. They require executing complex code from unknown third parties just to show a bit of text and some multi-media. This isn't needed at all. And it wasn't like this till mastodon v3 when they broke it.

Despite requiring Javascript execution mastodon actually does have the post contents of a URL in the hidden meta-content HTML header on the page where it scolds you and blocks you for not executing their arbitrary code. All they'd have to do is put that same text in the HTML as actual

text. And it's not just mastodon instances, the other fediverse "applications' are just as silly in their intentional breaking of accessibility for no reason.

Re: The Fediverse deserves a dumb graphical client

#4

Post by lynx97 »

superkuh wrote: post #2

It really does. But also, having to do this points out a glaring flaw in the design of the fediverse websites. They're applications and not documents. They require executing complex code from unknown third parties just to show a bit of text and some multi-media. This isn't needed at all. And it wasn't like this till mastodon v3 when they broke it. Despite requiring Javascript execution mastodon actually does have the…

I have yet to find a social network which is actually accessible. The Google thing (circles?) was never actually useable, it was the biggest horror show of all. m.facebook.com was basically the only website that was ever really accessible. All the other players, including the "free and morally superior" alternatives couldn't give two fucks about people with disabilities, which reflects nicely on the fact that they are actually not an alternative, they are a playground for misguided developers...

Fact is, if you are launching a social network which is not accessible from the get go, you are part of the problem. You have no moral high ground, you're just playing around and widening the digital divide, leaving people behind.

Re: The Fediverse deserves a dumb graphical client

#5

Post by mindslight »

First, I take issue with the idea of calling something "dumb" for trying to avoid modern app bloat, even as marketing. I understand the precedent of a "smart" device being something that backhauls your personal information to the surveillance industry (decidedly not smart!). But still, can we find a better name for the concept? "Native" ? "Lean" ? It shouldn't be about giving up some purported betterness of bloaty software, but rather about the benefits we get by doing so.

Second, it's kind of depressing that this is still tying itself to web technologies. What about a straightforward desktop client that uses a native desktop toolkit? I get that this is a difficult problem because a lot of protocols bake in reliance on web technologies and whatnot, but if I am looking for a simple graphical client I would expect something that aims to not simply dump content into webviews, nevermind still being dependent on an actual browser!

Re: The Fediverse deserves a dumb graphical client

#7

Post by guywithahat »

Somewhat unrelated but these sorts of clients are becoming great targets for AI coding. I've been able to create minimal gtk C++ apps for small sites with good API's in relatively little time, and they run beautifully since they're native apps.

I like the project though, it'd be cool to have a picture of what it looks like either on the git page or the blog article but I like the spirit of the project.

Re: The Fediverse deserves a dumb graphical client

#8

Post by capitainenemo »

superkuh wrote: post #2

It really does. But also, having to do this points out a glaring flaw in the design of the fediverse websites. They're applications and not documents. They require executing complex code from unknown third parties just to show a bit of text and some multi-media. This isn't needed at all. And it wasn't like this till mastodon v3 when they broke it. Despite requiring Javascript execution mastodon actually does have the…

At least Xitter has Nitter proxies after they went full Javascript - which is also great since it allows accessing content that's often behind a registration wall.
Post reply on HN