381–390 of 424 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, all of those things are possible. Now imagine a protocol built from the ground up for those purposes, not just possible, but the entire community and ecosystem embracing those things.
you mean http?
Why do we need to stick to Git? We need better tooling around the Patch Theory-based VCS which are better for decentralized working to begin with.
Immutable commits seem like a pretty good base for a decentralized VCS for me. In fact, Git was designed for this use case in the first place.
And with rebase, how are the commits immutable? Seems like MS GitHub found a way to mutably drop commits recently…
I'm hesitant to build anything load-bearing on AT Protocol given its PQ exposure: https://words.filippo.io/crqc-timeline/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that kind of makes sense to me, you chose that instance because you're OK with that admin making choices for you. Just like how I choose to post comments on HN, and if the admins/moderators tell me to stop something, or that now half my comments are gone for reason X, I can't really cry about it, all I can do is follow what admins do/say or jump ship.
> you chose that instance because you're OK with that admin making choices for you Nobody chooses instances for that, very few know anything about the admin, people just like the content until... in >70% of cases, bait and switch follows That's why Mastodon is such an incredible mess, it creates the conditions for serious problems, then goes: "you chose what you knew nothing about, nor there's any way to know anythin…
I've heard of instances carrying a lot of Nazi content being banned, and of instances choosing not to re-host adult media (which makes the interface a bit worse, but doesn't actually block you from getting that). But most admins from what I've seen are pretty clear on this in the about page of the instance.
70% seems like a wild claim.
I have had content I like being removed from major social media platforms, like reddit and tumblr.
Also, if you choose an instance and it gets shut down, you just start another account. This isn't serious business, it's social media. To me, complaining about having to choose an instance to start is like complaining about having to choose a class at the start of an RPG.
Personally, I really love mastodon as a platform and I don't understand all the hate it gets here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that kind of makes sense to me, you chose that instance because you're OK with that admin making choices for you. Just like how I choose to post comments on HN, and if the admins/moderators tell me to stop something, or that now half my comments are gone for reason X, I can't really cry about it, all I can do is follow what admins do/say or jump ship.
> you chose that instance because you're OK with that admin making choices for you Nobody chooses instances for that, very few know anything about the admin, people just like the content until... in >70% of cases, bait and switch follows That's why Mastodon is such an incredible mess, it creates the conditions for serious problems, then goes: "you chose what you knew nothing about, nor there's any way to know anythin…
As long as it’s like Steam and stays private it’ll be fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Similar UI but donation based and public repo only: codeberg.org Fixed low cost but different UI: sourcehut.org
Source Hut looks cool, the website is confusing though. What build systems do I get for 4$ a month ? Getting my friends to feel comfortable moving ( so they can view the UX ) too will be a challenge.
Although it doesn't have all the "plugins" and other stuff that CI tools have today, it provides fairly "standard" points of integration
For more info: https://man.sr.ht/builds.sr.ht/
I agree the website is a bit confusing at first, but after spending a couple of hours on it you can easily see how it's organised, for example to display branches and files it uses the more basic git terminology (e.g. main branch -> tree, list of commits -> log, branches and tags -> refs)
Why? I really don't see the purpose of a federation of git repos. Git is already totally decentralized. 99% of projects only have a small list of committers. Tangled just doesn't solve an actual problem. Github was used because it was an easy to set up, free, place to store code and share it, and it had source viewing which was a step up from sourceforge. With multiple solutions available that makes this easy, its ju…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Atproto isn’t “many servers sending messages to each other”. It’s structured more like RSS: 1) there’s an app-agnostic hosting layer (and anyone can run a host, a bit like personal site with RSS) 2) then there’s apps, which aggregate over data from all hosts (a bit like Google Reader or Feedly) So there’s no such thing as “defederating”. You don’t have many copies of Tangled beefing with each other. It’s more like yo…
The web is already structured like this. You can poll a URL for updates. You can host your own data. Anyone can build an app that aggregates from everyone's data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've written about this: https://anirudh.fi/future
there's something about new VC fundedbro narcissism that's so fascinating > GitHub? Where do we even begin… The problem with GitHub is neither its UX nor its functions. Its downfall is VC funding but you made sure to only copy that and none of the good things. > GitLab? Way too enterprise-y, and definitely not easy to self-host. The only reason you don't offer an enterprise version yet is because atproto sucks and th…