I'm glad Freenode has a user base for work related stuff, but I man do I miss when Undernet or Dalnet was still popular. I know I'll never run into my mother on IRC, and it is probably because of the format.
I too miss the good old days of Undernet, where Romanian criminals would show off hacked systems, or DDOS other IRC users.
Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
31–40 of 222 posts
Re: Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't disagree with you on that - but that's not written in your post so my point still stands. Many of the paint points are solved when using alternative clients. Alternative clients will allow you to, for example: * Use Slack on an ancient computer * Use TTS systems * Not use threads (you can just dump everything in the channel) * Not have link previews * Use keyboard only * Get a less distracting experience I'm…
You just described 6 use cases for IRC. Then I'll just stay on IRC.
Re: Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
#33IRC is capable. It is a box of nuts and bolts that lets us communicate and build awesome bots and so on.
Bloating the protocol gives us suitability: features that are robust and can federate.
Re: Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
To stefan's point, Slack clients are unofficial and unsupported software built on top of proprietary protocols which are subject to change at any time according to the whims of a private company which has their bottom line at heart instead of your communication needs.
I don't disagree with you on that - but that's not written in your post so my point still stands. Many of the paint points are solved when using alternative clients. Alternative clients will allow you to, for example: * Use Slack on an ancient computer * Use TTS systems * Not use threads (you can just dump everything in the channel) * Not have link previews * Use keyboard only * Get a less distracting experience I'm…
I kind of feel like the second-to-last paragraph of my article does address this.
Re: Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
#35Re: Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
#36IRCv3 is a scourge because of this. They’re looking to bloat the protocol. IRC is good because it’s IRC.
And when that RFC was made, they made strong decisions about bandwidth costs. They gave up things like federation and more.
So yeah, it's time that it's revisited in making a IRC that can be federated, multiple login/endpoints without using bouncers, and more. I welcome their new RFC. And it it doesn't work, we're free to keep what we currently have.
Re: Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
#37And it doesn't seem to me that "fixing" irc is just a matter of adding the bells and whistles, but there's some work to be done on the lower levels as well
For example, how well would irc work on mobile? Keeping logs requires a bot usually on irc as well.
Re: Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
#38> IRC messages are always lines of characters terminated with a CR-LF (Carriage Return - Line Feed) pair, and these messages shall not exceed 512 characters in length, counting all characters including the trailing CR-LF. Thus, there are 510 characters maximum allowed for the command and its parameters. Yeah, lets just forget how painful it was for non english speaking users to use IRC. 255 characters for unicode and…
Re: Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
#39Re: Absence of certain features in IRC considered a feature
#40> IRC messages are always lines of characters terminated with a CR-LF (Carriage Return - Line Feed) pair, and these messages shall not exceed 512 characters in length, counting all characters including the trailing CR-LF. Thus, there are 510 characters maximum allowed for the command and its parameters. Yeah, lets just forget how painful it was for non english speaking users to use IRC. 255 characters for unicode and…