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

Offpunk 3.0

ploum.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: Offpunk 3.0

#32

Post by bovermyer »

I was curious, so I tried it out.

I ran `apt install offpunk` on my Debian laptop.

Then, I ran "offpunk" and got a new terminal prefixed "ON>".

Curious, I entered "help" and got a list of topics. A few stood out as immediately interesting, so I tried "open https://benovermyer.com" to open my site. It said I needed to "go" somewhere first. So, I tried "go https://benovermyer.com" instead.

That showed me a text preview of my front page, interestingly with content between headers stripped out. OK, that's neat, but now what?

So I now tried "open", and this time it opened the page in my browser, Vivaldi. It was my site, sure enough, but cached locally and missing my main image. All the CSS was intact, though.

That's as far as I've gotten at this point, but it was an interesting enough experience that I thought I would share. It's a very different flow from what I was expecting.

Re: Offpunk 3.0

#33

Post by bovermyer »

sivers wrote: post #31

OFFPUNK sounds like a good name for a punk-like movement to rebel against the entire internet and live offline.

I feel like that movement already exists but uses a different name. Or doesn't use a name at all.

Re: Offpunk 3.0

#34

Post by esseph »

ghostly_s wrote: post #29
esseph wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting how long we're been using web search, and the total lack of user education on the features. "Gemini protocol" with quotes should help. +Gemini +protocol for more fuzzy, less accurate results

these operators straight up do not work anymore in any mainstream search engine.

I use them daily with Google. Works great.

You can open several incignito browser tabs to try it out side by side. It's easy to compare!

Note: In the US, doing English searches, using a chrome-based browser. Coming in with Firefox WILL give you different search results. Sometimes I do that intentionally (can be useful).

Re: Offpunk 3.0

#35

Post by ploum »

bovermyer wrote: post #32

I was curious, so I tried it out. I ran `apt install offpunk` on my Debian laptop. Then, I ran "offpunk" and got a new terminal prefixed "ON>". Curious, I entered "help" and got a list of topics. A few stood out as immediately interesting, so I tried "open https://benovermyer.com " to open my site. It said I needed to "go" somewhere first. So, I tried "go https://benovermyer.com " instead. That showed me a text previ…

the "open" open outside.

So you go to a site. If the site is not complete, try "v full" (for "view full").

The reason is that there was no unmerdify rule for your site and that readability mistakenly assumes that lot of your site is spam/ads (readability doing that is the reason why we push for unmerdify)

Re: Offpunk 3.0

#37

Post by anthk »

swannodette wrote: post #19
anthk wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gnus it's dog slow, be with email or with usenet. I say this as an ex-Emacs user where I even plugged slrn's cache in order to speed up things, but over 100k messages that was unusable in my netbook, even under 64 bit machines and native compilation. Slrn did it better. On RSS, I use sfeed which is more Unix like and I just plumb lynx/links or whatever I like as a reader. And fast, much fast than GNUs, Elfeed or the…

I don't think Gnus is that bad once you spend some time setting it up. For groups with a ton of content where I mostly want to search, I found it was better to just download the whole group and index into notmuch. I could query 20 years of the Smalltalk USENET group or the Supercollider mailing list instantly.

Read again, I used slrnpull's cache. Mail was fast with Mu4e and Mairix. GNUS with slrn, not much. I have tons of articles from comp.* and some alt.* related groups. People loves to talk at comp.misc and comp.arch.

Also GNUS' caching it's really slow compared to slrn. Yes, I know, Elisp vs C, but even with native compilation it was excruciatingly slow. I've seen bytecoded TCL back in the day running really fast for these tasks.

Post reply on HN