Live data from Hacker News

The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of shit

urbanists.social

21–30 of 493 posts

Re: The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of shit

#21

Any other embedded programmers or older people that remember what an AT protocol really is confused every time they see a story about Bluesky?

Yeah, i just wanted to comment how the AT protocol is really old, and that mobile developers decided to reuse it and add a gajillion extensions to it, so it's not really the (base) protocols fault...

We might be getting old...

Re: The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of shit

#24

Any other embedded programmers or older people that remember what an AT protocol really is confused every time they see a story about Bluesky?

This is the first time I’ve even heard of Bluesky and I’m still not sure what it is and what this new AT protocol is, so yes, was confused.

Re: The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of shit

#25
post #8
post #3

> It turns out using Git, which is almost always used with a centralized 'remote', to do federation, which needs to be weakly consistent, IS A BAD IDEA!!!!! Given that a user owns their feed, I'm not sure why this is a bad idea? I want to take this critiques here seriously but there's not a ton to grasp onto. It definitely didn't feel great that AtProto built from bare ground, reinvented json-schema & OpenAPI for no…

My limited understanding of the problem about git as the basis for user data storage is that it then would expose the complexity of git rebasing and the rest via federation. Git is great with a centralized remote (like I believe the original post is getting at) but less so in a federated setting.

Well, rebasing is definitely not a must when using Git.

Re: The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of shit

#27

Any other embedded programmers or older people that remember what an AT protocol really is confused every time they see a story about Bluesky?

I'm happy I went straight to the comments because with yours I found out the article won't talk about the "good" old AT command protocol, which indeed, not so long ago I had to integrate with a C project for AVR chips. What else could it be? :-)

Re: The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of shit

#28
I'm glad somebody looked, because basics like when messages are actually passed around is something I didn't see in the atproto docs either.

Alice on server X follows Bob on server Y. When are Bob's posts delivered to X such that Alice may see them? Are they pushed from Y? Are they pulled by X?

Polling seems like an absolute disaster in an environment where people have an expectation of semi real-time communication.

Re: The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of shit

#29
post #20

[flagged]

Between that and the bitching about capitalism it is hard to take the rant seriously. If you have a technical argument why the protocol is bad, adding political stuff on top of it makes it less credible.

BTW this is really a critique at bluesky FOR using the AT protocol and not the AT protocol itself. It's not like Sam has an option to use something else if he wants to interface with Bluesky.

Re: The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of shit

#30
post #9

Any other embedded programmers or older people that remember what an AT protocol really is confused every time they see a story about Bluesky?

To be fair, anyone who's worked with cell modems knows that the other AT protocol is also an obtuse crock of shit.

Yeah, the headline even more "that's not news" when you're talking about modems. ;-)
Post reply on HN