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

The AT protocol is the most obtuse crock of shit

urbanists.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 493 posts

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

#201

Post by panick21_ »

pfraze wrote: post #54

Okay well. I work on Bluesky and helped build the AT Protocol. I'm sorry Sam differs with us on this, and I'm glad that Activity Pub is already there for him. However, Sam doesn't understand the ATProto very well and I want to clear it up a bit. Before I do, let me just say: Bluesky and the AT Proto are in beta. The stuff that seems incomplete or poorly documented is incomplete and poorly documented. Everything has m…

I have not looked much at AT, but it seems it solves many of the same problems as Matrix. Instead of redoing all the Crypto and everything, why not build on martrix. There were other Twitter like things on Matrix before.

As far as I'm aware its developed on Matrix and had some connection with it, so this isn't a case of not knowing about it so there is likely some engineering reasons why this was not done.

Would be interesting to understand.

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

#202

Post by sschueller »

anticristi wrote: post #83

Anyone else read "AT protocol" and thought of old modems?

Yes, I was expecting an explanation in the comments why it is not a crock of shit because back in the day we had only very few bytes to communicate and the "young kids" today don't know what they have etc...

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

#203

Post by Avamander »

tinco wrote: post #158
chrismorgan wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Email had this exact same problem, yet was able to build protocols on top of it in order to fix the authenticity problem. On the contrary, email has no solution to the authenticity problem that’s being talked about. Even what there is is a right mess and not even slightly how you would choose to build such a thing deliberately. If you want to verify authenticity via SPF/DKIM/DMARC, you have to query DNS on the send…

I think they're talking about GPG, not SPF/DKIM/DMARC. Which is a risky thing to do, because most people don't associate GPG with positive feelings about well designed solutions, but they're right in that it works well, solves the problem and is built squarely on top of email. The reason that it's not generally well received is that there's no good social network for distributing the keys, and no popular clients inte…

In this case GPG, DKIM and even S/MIME are on equal standing. Validity can be checked only on reception because there's no validity stapling mechanisms.

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

#204

Post by lapcat »

JenrHywy wrote: post #123
lapcat wrote: post #46

> "Additionally, if a Bluesky server goes down, their way of keeping access to your data is by storing all of it on your device!" This seems troubling, if it's accurate. [I've edited the above quote to remove some all-caps and exclamation points.]

Having access to your data on your own devices is... bad now?

The issue is not "access" to your data. You're not forbidden from accessing your data in any case. The real issue is that it may be bad to have full and sole responsibility for maintaining backups of your social media data.

1) If you add image files and especially video files to the mix, the size of your data can get huge.

2) Smartphone users especially don't have a ton of free storage space.

3) In general, people aren't great at maintaining their own backups.

The question is why a so-called distributed network can't maintain distributed copies of user data, rather than forcing the burden onto the users.

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

#207

Post by hashar »

anticristi wrote: post #83

Anyone else read "AT protocol" and thought of old modems?

Definitely it rang as Hayes AT command set to me ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayes_AT_command_set ). So I was kind of expecting a dig into those commands which I recently had to relearn again for automobiles OBD-2 :)

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

#209

Post by knorker »

sgtnoodle wrote: post #183
pfraze wrote: post #54

Okay well. I work on Bluesky and helped build the AT Protocol. I'm sorry Sam differs with us on this, and I'm glad that Activity Pub is already there for him. However, Sam doesn't understand the ATProto very well and I want to clear it up a bit. Before I do, let me just say: Bluesky and the AT Proto are in beta. The stuff that seems incomplete or poorly documented is incomplete and poorly documented. Everything has m…

Not having read the article, I got pretty far into your second paragraph before realizing you all aren't talking about configuring a modem over a serial link. It's funny because the "Hayes AT command set" protocol is also an obtuse crock. I was really hoping you were going to open my mind with some deep wisdom straight out of 1981.

It's all the rage nowadays. Microsoft pushing LoRA, which has nothing to do with LoRa.

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

#210

Post by [deleted] »

sgtnoodle wrote: post #183
pfraze wrote: post #54

Okay well. I work on Bluesky and helped build the AT Protocol. I'm sorry Sam differs with us on this, and I'm glad that Activity Pub is already there for him. However, Sam doesn't understand the ATProto very well and I want to clear it up a bit. Before I do, let me just say: Bluesky and the AT Proto are in beta. The stuff that seems incomplete or poorly documented is incomplete and poorly documented. Everything has m…

Not having read the article, I got pretty far into your second paragraph before realizing you all aren't talking about configuring a modem over a serial link. It's funny because the "Hayes AT command set" protocol is also an obtuse crock. I was really hoping you were going to open my mind with some deep wisdom straight out of 1981.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN